GP-1999 ERJ Fuel Conservation Philosophy

EMBRAER 170/175/190/195
FUEL CONSERVATION
EMPRESA BRASILEIRA DE AERONÁUTICA S.A.
THIS DOCUMENT INCLUDES INFORMATION TO CLARIFY

EMBRAER´S OPERATIONAL PHILOSOPHY REGARDING FUEL
CONSERVATION.
THIS MANUAL IS APPLICABLE TO EMBRAER 170/190 FAMILY
AIRPLANES.
GP–1999
NOVEMBER 30, 2004
REVISION 2 – MAY 10, 2007
Copyright 2004 by EMBRAER - Empresa Brasileira de Aeronáutica S.A.. All rights reserved. This document shall not
be copied or reproduced, whether in whole or in part, in any form or by any means without the express written
authorization of Embraer. The information, technical data, designs and drawings disclosed in this document are
property information of Embraer or third parties and shall not be used or disclosed to any third party without
permission of Embraer.
GENERAL FUEL CONSERVATION
PUBLICATION
LIST OF EFFECTIVE PAGES
ORIGINAL ........... 0........... NOV 30, 2004

REVISION ........... 1............MAY 22, 2006
REVISION ........... 2............MAY 10, 2007
* Title ................ REVISION 2 * 21................... REVISION 2

* 22................... REVISION 2
* 0-LEP * 23................... REVISION 2
* 1 ..................... REVISION 2 * 24................... REVISION 2
* 26................... REVISION 2
0-TOC * 27................... REVISION 2
* 30................... REVISION 2
GP * 31................... REVISION 2
* 10 ................... REVISION 2 * 41................... REVISION 2
* Asterisk indicates pages revised, added or deleted by the current revision.

GP-1999
0-LEP
REVISION 2 Page 1
FUEL CONSERVATION GENERAL
PUBLICATION
* 52 ...................REVISION 2
* 53 ...................REVISION 2
* 54 ...................REVISION 2
* 55 ...................REVISION 2
* 56 ...................REVISION 2
* 57 ...................REVISION 2
* 58 ...................REVISION 2
* 59 ...................REVISION 2
* 60 ...................REVISION 2
* 61 ...................REVISION 2
* 62 ...................REVISION 2
* 63 ...................REVISION 2
* 64 ...................REVISION 2
* 65 ...................REVISION 2
* 66 ...................REVISION 2
* 67 ...................REVISION 2
* 68 ...................REVISION 2
* 69 ...................REVISION 2
* 70 ...................REVISION 2
* 71 ...................REVISION 2
* 72 ...................REVISION 2
* 73 ...................REVISION 2
* 74 ...................REVISION 2
* 75 ...................REVISION 2
* 76 ...................REVISION 2
* Asterisk indicates pages revised, added or deleted by the current revision.

GP-1999
0-LEP
Page 2 REVISION 2
GENERAL TABLE OF CONTENTS
PUBLICATION
FUEL CONSERVATION
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION I – GENERAL ..................................................................... 1

INTRODUCTION ........................................................................... 1
SECTION II – FLIGHT OPERATIONS AND PERFORMANCE.......... 7
OEW INCREASE AND CONTROL................................................ 8
FLIGHT PLANNING....................................................................... 9
IN-FLIGHT PROFILE ................................................................... 23
SECTION III – AIRPLANE SYSTEMS .............................................. 46
PROPULSION SYSTEM.............................................................. 46
AERODYNAMICS ........................................................................ 59
ENVIRONMENTAL AND PNEUMATICS..................................... 65
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM ............................................................... 71
SECTION IV – CONCLUSIONS ....................................................... 76
GP-1999
0-TOC
REVISION 2 Page 1
TABLE OF CONTENTS GENERAL
PUBLICATION
INTENTIONALLY BLANK
GP-1999
0-TOC
Page 2 REVISION 2
PUBLICATION
SECTION I − GENERAL
INTRODUCTION
Since 2002 oil prices have experienced a dramatic increase reaching
all-time highs. Factors such as global tensions and hurricanes at U.S.
Gulf Coast have contributed to this scenario.
GP-1999
GP
REVISION 2 Page 1
PUBLICATION
Aviation fuel prices closely follow that trend, which by its turn has a
detrimental impact upon an airline’s costs and profitability.
A Fuel Conservation Program is a set of maintenance and operational
procedures that assist an operator in minimizing the fuel required for a
given trip, thereby reducing costs and improving profitability.
Embraer is fully engaged in providing customer airlines with
information that demonstrates how they may best optimize their
operations such as properly maintained/operated systems and tapping
an airplane’s performance resources.
With flight safety as its foremost consideration, every operational
procedure is also developed looking forward on reducing operational
costs. The EMBRAER 170/190 Family was designed focused on this
philosophy.
FUEL BURN CONTRIBUTION TO OPERATING COSTS

Cash Operating Costs (COC) are those that can be related directly to
the operation of a particular airplane on a particular route. It excludes
ownership costs and cargo/passenger related expenses. For a given
route, it has three main components:
• Fixed Costs: fixed expenses of each leg, i.e. landing,
navigation and airport fees;
• Time Related Costs: all the costs that are a function of flight
time, i.e. maintenance costs, crew costs, etc… ($/hour);
• Fuel Related Costs: cost of fuel burned in a given leg ($/kg or
$/lb).
Fuel related costs might reach 40% of the total COC of a flight.
On typical domestic flights, using a 70/120-seat jet on a 600 NM trip,
fuel cost represents an average of 35% of the COC in US and 30% of
the COC in Europe. Considering a 20-airplane fleet and 10-hour daily
utilization, these percentages can lead to a US$ 50 to US$ 68 million
fuel costs per year.
GP-1999
GP
Page 2 REVISION 2
PUBLICATION
TYPICAL OPERATIONAL PROFILE:

All the costs/savings calculated in this publication consider the
following operational scenario:
Flight Profile:
• Climb Schedule: 290 KIAS/M 0.70
• Cruise Schedule: M 0.78
• Descent Schedule M 0.77/290 KIAS
• Route Conditions: ISA, Calm Wind
• Cruise Altitude: FL350
• Destination and Departure Airport at Sea Level
• Alternate Airport: 200 NM Distant, Sea Level
• Alternate Cruise Altitude: FL 290
Operator’s Profile:
• Average Load Factor: 70%
• 20-airplane fleet
• Utilization: Six legs per day/Six days per week
• Average Fuel Costs: US$ 1.70/Gal = US$ 0.56/kg
• Fuel density 0.803 kg/L (6.7 lb/Gal)
• Average Leg Length: 600 NM (1.52 hours average trip time)
REDUCTION OF FUEL COSTS

Flight operations and correct line maintenance have significant impact
on trip fuel burn. It is very sensitive to flight and maintenance crew
training and conscience, once technical information that is provided is
used as a guideline for their day-to-day routine. Investments in this
area shall be the first and easiest method to reduce operational costs,
via fuel related expenditures.
GP-1999
GP
REVISION 2 Page 3
PUBLICATION
Consider the following scenarios for the EMBRAER 170/190 Family.

Using FAA and EASA domestic reserves, the typical performance for
a 600 NM trip are:
EMBRAER 170 EMBRAER 175
TYPICAL
OPERATIONAL FAA RESERVES EASA RESERVES FAA RESERVES EASA RESERVES
PROFILE
lb kg lb kg
TAKEOFF
71266 32203 74033 33455
WEIGHT
TRIP FUEL 5668 2566 5747 2602
TRIP TIME 92 min 91 min
EMBRAER 190 EMBRAER 195

TYPICAL
OPERATIONAL FAA RESERVES EASA RESERVES FAA RESERVES EASA RESERVES
PROFILE
lb kg lb kg
TAKEOFF
94946 42925 98497 44678
WEIGHT
TRIP FUEL 6949 3147 7178 3256
TRIP TIME 90 min 90 min
Consider an airline using the EMBRAER 170/190 Family under those

operational conditions (typical for domestic airlines on US and
Europe), the annual fuel burn cost is:
600 NM TRIP EMBRAER 170 EMBRAER 175
kg 26 26
1% FUEL SAVINGS PER LEG
lb 57 57
ANNUAL SAVINGS kg 960000 975000
(20 AIRPLANE FLEET) lb 2120000 2150000
600 NM TRIP EMBRAER 190 EMBRAER 195

kg 31 33
1% FUEL SAVINGS PER LEG
lb 69 72
ANNUAL SAVINGS kg 1180000 1220000

(20 AIRPLANE FLEET) lb 2600000 2700000
GP-1999
GP
Page 4 REVISION 2
PUBLICATION
Note that apparently small amounts of fuel burn reduction lead to

significant annual savings that is proportional to fleet size. In our
example, a 26 to 33 kg reduction on fuel consumption on each leg is
attainable using adequate operational and maintenance practices.
Depending on airplane model

1% reduction on Fuel Consumption represents potential savings from
approximately US$ 538,000.00 to US$ 680,000.00
(per year/20 airplane fleet)
FUEL CONSERVATION PHILOSOPHY

This publication is intended to show customer airlines how to
efficiently operate the EMBRAER 170/190 Family to obtain potential
fuel savings in their day-to-day operations. It means that all:
• Airplane systems must be operated properly;
• Airplane systems must be maintained properly;
• Airplane performance and operational resources are explored.
Most of the factors that can degrade fuel consumption will be
discussed, aside providing operational recommendations that improve
fuel mileage. Flight safety is the primary and basic concept in all the
proposed procedures. The systems/areas that have direct impact on
fuel consumption are:
• Flight Operations and Performance;
• Propulsion System;
• Aerodynamics;
• Environmental and Pneumatic systems;
• Electrical System.
GP-1999
GP
REVISION 2 Page 5
PUBLICATION
This publication is directed to all those that are or can be engaged in a

fuel conservation program inside an airline, i.e. Flight Operations
Engineers, Flight Dispatchers, Flight Crews (Pilots) and Maintenance
Personnel (Engineers and Mechanics).
The Flight Operations Chapter focuses on the operational environment
and it is recommended that it be distributed to Pilots, Flight Operations
Engineers and Dispatchers. The remaining chapters address
characteristics and operation of systems related to fuel conservation
and as such, their distribution is mainly recommended to Maintenance
Personnel.
GP-1999
GP
Page 6 REVISION 2
PUBLICATION
SECTION II − FLIGHT OPERATIONS AND

PERFORMANCE
Correct airplane operation is a key factor to maximize fuel savings.

More than any other maintenance procedures and tasks, operational
factors may contribute with more than 1% of fuel savings.
Deviations from the optimum lateral and vertical profiles may lead to
significant fuel burn and trip time increase, with resulting increase on
operational costs.
GP-1999
GP
REVISION 2 Page 7
PUBLICATION
The main factors that may determine such deviations are:

• Air Traffic Control constraints: speeds and altitudes, radar
vectoring away from planned flight path, etc;
• Weather deviations;
• Pilot’s flying techniques: use of autopilot, speed variations,
etc;
• Airline Policy;
• MEL/CDL items which require altitude and/or speed
restriction.
Full knowledge and use of an airplane’s performance resources by the
Pilots are essential to optimize trip fuel burn and time. Flight
Dispatchers may also be involved, once an optimized flight starts with
good flight planning whose underlying philosophy is fuel conservation.
The FMS is a powerful tool in order to optimize lateral and vertical
navigation, minimizing the cost of the flight.
Furthermore, the AOM presents supplementary information in order to
optimize vertical navigation through the Flight Planning section.
OEW INCREASE AND CONTROL

It is perfectly conceivable that an airplane’s Operational Empty Weight
(OEW) increases along the years. This may be caused by many
factors, such as:
• Dirt and water/humidity accumulation on hidden parts;
• Dirt accumulation along airplane’s external surfaces;
• Addition of new equipment, such as galley items, manuals, life
vests, rafts, etc;
• Maintenance structural repairs;
• Not removing older finishing paintings.
In average, a natural increase of an airplane’s OEW is approximately
0.15% to 0.20% per each year of utilization due to dirt and humidity
accumulation inside the airplane. This value tends to stabilize after 10
years at around 2%.
GP-1999
GP
Page 8 REVISION 2
PUBLICATION
A small increase of an airplane’s weight may lead to significant

additional yearly costs.
Some actions may be suggested to reduce OEW, but these must be
carefully evaluated by each airline, considering each particular
operational scenario and philosophy. For example:
• Consideration of different pantries for charter flights,
international flights and domestic flights;
• For domestic flights, reduce the pantry weight per flight, by
verifying the possibility to increase the number of stations able
to board catering on the airplanes. Using this practice, the
airplane does not need to be loaded with pantry for the several
legs;
• Use of fixed Basic Empty Weights (BEWs) increased for
different pantries, according to the type of the flight, instead of
average Basic Operational Weights (BOWs) with average
pantries and calculate the Flight Plan by tail number instead of
consider the average OEW, leading to more efficient fuel burn;
• Emergency equipment: Items associated to Overwater
Operations should be placed on-board only when necessary
(like rafts and life vests);
• Potable water should be carried in strictly controlled
quantities;
• Regular maintenance inspections of thermal/acoustic blankets
or other areas capable of water/moisture accumulation;
• Keep the airplane interior clean, avoiding the migration of
dust, garbage or water inside the main cabin hidden areas.
A weight control program is essential to detect this kind of tendency
FLIGHT PLANNING
An optimized flight begins with optimized flight planning. The fuel
conservation policy should be present during dispatch procedures in
order to minimize the Cash Operational Cost of a trip.
In order to do this, some important topics are suggested:
GP-1999
GP
REVISION 2 Page 9
PUBLICATION
REGULATORY RESERVES AND DISPATCH POLICY

The less onboard reserve fuel, the lower the landing weight upon
arrival at a destination and the less fuel consumed in flight.
In a typical short/medium leg scenario (less than 1200 NM or
2.5 hours flight) the most significant factor in reserve fuel is the
alternate trip fuel.
Of course, meteorological conditions influence alternate choices.
Consider an alternate airport distant 200 NM from the destination
airport and also the Typical Flight Profile. The following chart shows
trip fuel variation for every 100 NM increase of this distance:
EXPECTED FUEL BURN INCREASE COMPARING WITH

AN ALTERNATE AIRPORT 200 NM FAR FROM DESTINATION
4.0%
3.5%
TRIP FUEL INCREASE (%)
3.0%
E170
2.5% E175
E190
E195
2.0%
1.5%
1.0%
0.5%
300 400 500 600 700 800
ALTERNATE AIRPORT DISTANCE (NM)
GP-1999
GP
Page 10 REVISION 2
PUBLICATION
Considering the Typical Operational Profile:
EVERY 100 NM INCREASE IN ALTERNATE AIRPORT DISTANCE MEANS:
ANNUAL EXTRA FUEL BURN ANNUAL EXTRA COST

AIRPLANE
(kg) (US$)
EMBRAER 170 580000 325,000.00
EMBRAER 175 670000 375,000.00
EMBRAER 190 686000 384,000.00
EMBRAER 195 863000 483,000.00

(PER YEAR/20 AIRPLANE FLEET)
EXTRA FUEL CONSIDERATIONS

Reliable dispatch information is very important in order to aid the
Captains to define the final fuel on board for the flight. The suggested
fuel on board calculated by the dispatch systems shall consider all the
factors that may interfere on the flight safety.
Meteorological conditions along the route and at destination are
certainly significant and may be considered on the suggested fuel on
board through the dispatch release analysis.
The impact of adding unnecessary extra fuel will increase takeoff
weight and leads to trip fuel increase.
GP-1999
GP
REVISION 2 Page 11
PUBLICATION
The chart below shows the impact of adding extra 200 kg (440 lb) of
fuel for different flight lengths:
EXPECTED FUEL BURN INCREASE ADDING 200 kg OF EXTRA FUEL
0.45%
0.40%
E170
0.35% E175
E190
E195
0.30%
0.25%
0.20%
500 600 700 800 900 1000
TRIP DISTANCE (NM)
DEPENDING ON AIRPLANE MODEL, 200 kg INCREASE ON TAKEOFF FUEL

MEANS:

AIRPLANE
(kg) (US$)
EMBRAER 170 337000 189,000.00
EMBRAER 175 355000 199,000.00
EMBRAER 190 300000 168,000.00
EMBRAER 195 340000 190,000.00

GP-1999
GP
Page 12 REVISION 2
PUBLICATION
REDUCED LANDING WEIGHT

The reduction of 1% on the landing weight may produce significant trip
fuel savings, for the EMBRAER 170/190 Family it varies from 0.45% to
0.70% depending upon airplane/engine configuration.
Zero Fuel Weight (ZFW) management on flight plan calculations is an
important factor to control landing weight and reduce trip fuel.
One effective way to manage the ZFW effect on trip fuel, is assure that
the payload used to calculate the flight plan is as near as possible of
the actual payload on the airplane. In many cases this payload is an
estimated value based on the flight reservation system.
The following chart shows the extra fuel uplifted when considering, in
flight planning calculation, extra 500 kg (1100 lb) in ZFW for different
flight lengths:
IMPACT OF 500 kg DIFFERENCE ON ZERO FUEL WEIGHT ON THE

FLIGHT PLANNING CALCULATION
65
60
EXTRA FUEL UPLIFTED (kg)
55
E170
50 E175
E190
45 E195
40
35
30
500 600 700 800 900 1000
TRIP DISTANCE (NM)
Basically, Landing Weight is: OEW + Payload + Reserve Fuel and those
factors must be controlled carefully in order to minimize trip fuel
GP-1999
GP
REVISION 2 Page 13
PUBLICATION
500 kg OF DIFFERENCE ON ZERO FUEL WEIGHT ON THE FLIGHT PLANNING

CALCULATION MEANS:

AIRPLANE
(kg) (US$)
EMBRAER 170 74900 42,000.00
EMBRAER 175 74900 42,000.00
EMBRAER 190 37500 21,000.00
EMBRAER 195 56600 31,000.00

OPTIMUM CRUISE ALTITUDE

The Optimum Cruise Altitude is the pressure altitude, for a given
weight and speed, that provides maximum specific range. For
short/medium range flights, it’s reasonable to define an Optimum
Cruise Altitude as the altitude at which the entire flight fuel burn is
minimized (i.e., minimizing Climb + Cruise + Descent fuel).
The table below shows additional trip fuel burn when flying above or
below Optimum Altitude at M 0.78:
FUEL BURN INCREASE OF FLYING

ABOVE OR BELOW OPTIMUM ALTITUDE AT M 0.78
Above/Below Trip Fuel Increase (%)

Optimum
altitude EMBRAER EMBRAER EMBRAER EMBRAER
(ft) 170 175 190 195
2000 1.0 1.3 1.1 1.3
0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
-2000 2.0 1.1 1.2 1.2
GP-1999
GP
Page 14 REVISION 2
PUBLICATION
ADDITIONAL FUEL BURN FLYING 2000 FT BELOW OPTIMUM ALTITUDE

AIRPLANE
(kg) (US$)
Embraer 170 1900000 1,060,000.00
Embraer 175 1090000 610,000.00
Embraer 190 1385000 780,000.00
Embraer 195 1385000 780,000.00
The optimum altitude can be verified on AOM flight planning section,

for LRC and Mach 0.78.
STEP CLIMB
In general, as airplane weight decreases (due to fuel burn), optimum
altitude increases.
Therefore, over long routes, airlines employ step climb procedures
that allow an airplane to fly as long as possible close to optimum
altitude.
(Air Traffic rules and restrictions)
Next ATC
Flight level
Cruising
Altitude
Optimum
Altitude
GP-1999
GP
REVISION 2 Page 15
PUBLICATION
For EMBRAER 170/190 Family:
The optimum altitude increases in a rate of 15 ft/min to 20 ft/min
It is advisable that, for every 100 min of cruise-leveled flight, 2000 ft

step climb is performed.
Considering step climb procedures, where 2000 ft above optimum
altitude is desirable, the buffet margin may be reduced to 1.2 G (or 33-
deg bank to shaker).
WIND-ALTITUDE TRADE
The optimum altitude is normally calculated for zero wind, but wind is
a factor that may justify operations considerably above or below the
optimum altitude.
If a stronger headwind is present at the optimum altitude than at a
lower altitude, for example, it might be advantageous to fly at a lower
altitude (and weaker headwind) in order to save fuel. This is called
wind-altitude trade.
The main idea is to compare the ground-specific range (ground speed
per fuel flow ratio) on actual and predicted flight levels.
Consider for example an EMBRAER 170 planned to cruise on
FL350/M 0.78, with 20 kt expected headwind. After reach the top of
climb it encountered 60 kt of headwind however, during the climb the
crew noticed a headwind component of 10 kt at FL 310.
In this case it is feasible to cruise at FL 310.
The table below shows the differences on specific range for the
example mentioned:
FL310 FL350
TAS (kt) 458 450

GROUND SPEED (kt) 448 390
FUEL FLOW (kg/h) 1854 1652
GROUND SPECIFIC RANGE (NM/kg) 0.2416 0.2360
The specific range at FL 310 is 2.36% greater than the one on FL 350.
GP-1999
GP
Page 16 REVISION 2
PUBLICATION
It is provided M 0.78 and Long Range Cruise (LRC) tables with more
explanations and one example in the EMBRAER 170/190 Family
AOMs Flight Planning section.
FUEL TANKERING
Fuel tankering is a procedure adopted by airlines when there is a high
fuel price differential between origin and destination airports and, if it is
cost effective, the airline will load additional fuel at the origin airport in
order to minimize (or even avoid) refueling at the destination airport,
reducing the total fuel cost.
Fuel tankering information is provided on chart format in EMBRAER
170/190 Family AOM Flight Planning Section. Fuel surplus tables are
provided for LRC and M 0.78, as function of trip distance.
The following factors must be observed:
The amount of fuel tankered must be such that the total fuel remaining
at the end of the flight shall not exceed the minimum fuel required for
the next flight, unless a fuel tankering analysis has been done for a
multi-leg flight.
• Tankered fuel may not cause the airplane’s weight to exceed
the maximum takeoff and landing weights;
• Due to increased landing weights, additional maintenance
costs may be expected as a result of fuel tankering. Tire and
brake wear are the most affected items. In order to
compensate, some operators adjust the break-even fuel price
on destination by another factor. This factor is usually
“empirical” and is determined by airlines based on each
maintenance costs and is not considered in AOM charts;
GP-1999
GP
REVISION 2 Page 17
PUBLICATION
When a quick analysis of the fuel tankering feasibility is required, it is

recommended that the Operator should generate a quick reference
table to be consulted by Flight Dispatchers and Pilots, during the
calculation of the fuel required for takeoff, for example:
MAXIMUM ALTITUDE
For a given speed, weight and thrust, there is a maximum altitude at
which straight and level flight is possible.
In order to provide some performance margin for an airplane flying at
Maximum Altitude, occasionally it is defined as the maximum altitude
for a given speed, weight and thrust at which the airplane still has a
residual rate of climb.
The maximum altitude at which an airplane can fly is limited by three
factors:
• Engine thrust;
• Capacity of the wing to generate sufficient buffet-free lift;
• Operational envelope.
For EMBRAER 170/190 Family, the maximum operational altitude
calculated for 1.3 G margins (providing a 40 deg bank margin to stick
shaker activation), is always above the optimum altitude. Depending
on the weight, the maximum altitude limited by 1.3 G is 500 ft to 1750
ft above the optimum altitude for EMBRAER 170/175 and 1000 ft to
2000 ft for EMBRAER 190/195.
GP-1999
GP
Page 18 REVISION 2
PUBLICATION
CRUISE SPEEDS SELECTION

EMBRAER provides Long Range Cruise (LRC) tables and M 0.78
cruise tables in the AOMs Flight Planning section.
• LRC tables are recommended for long-range flights where fuel
consumption is a significant factor;
• M 0.78 tables provide a suitable combination of fuel
consumption and flight time and are recommended for short
and medium range flights (below 1200 NM).
Depending on an operator’s time related costs, intermediate speed
schedules may be chosen in order to minimize Cash Operational
Costs. Other speed tables may be provided through the INFLIGHT
PERFORMANCE SOFTWARE.
The following charts show the impact of flying lower Mach numbers
compared to M 0.78 during cruise for the Typical Operational Profile:
GP-1999
GP
REVISION 2 Page 19
PUBLICATION
EXPECTED FUEL BURN REDUCTION OF FLYING

M 0.74 INSTEAD OF M 0.78 IN CRUISE
-1.0%
TRIP FUEL IMPACT (%)
-1.5%
E170
-2.0% E175
E190
E195
-2.5%
-3.0%
500 600 700 800 900 1000
TRIP DISTANCE (NM)
EXPECTED TRIP TIME INCREASE OF FLYING

5.0%
4.5%
(%)
INCREASE(%
TIMEINCREASE
4.0% E170
E175
E190
TRIPTIME
3.5%
E195
TRIP
3.0%
2.5%
500 600 700 800 900 1000
TRIP DISTANCE (NM)
GP-1999
GP
Page 20 REVISION 2
PUBLICATION

-0.8%
-0.9%
-1.0%
-1.1% E170
-1.2% E175
E190
-1.3%
E195
-1.4%
-1.5%
-1.6%
500 600 700 800 900 1000
TRIP DISTANCE (NM)

3.0%
2.5%
(%)
INCREASE (%)
TIME INCREASE
2.0%
E170
1.5% E175
E190
TRIP TIME
1.0% E195
TRIP
0.5%
0.0%
500 600 700 800 900 1000
TRIP DISTANCE (NM)
GP-1999
GP
REVISION 2 Page 21
PUBLICATION

LRC INSTEAD OF M0.78 IN CRUISE
-1.0%
-1.5%
-2.0%
-2.5% E170
-3.0% E175
E190
-3.5%
E195
-4.0%
-4.5%
-5.0%
500 600 700 800 900 1000
TRIP DISTANCE (NM)

LRC INSTEAD OF M0.78 IN CRUISE
9.0%
8.0%
(%)
INCREASE(%)
TIMEINCREASE
7.0%
E170
6.0% E175
E190
TRIPTIME
5.0% E195
TRIP
4.0%
3.0%
500 600 700 800 900 1000
TRIP DISTANCE (NM)
GP-1999
GP
Page 22 REVISION 2
PUBLICATION
COST INDEX
In the AOMs Flight Planning section, Embraer provides economic
speeds in function gross weight and cost index for cruise phase of
flight taking in account the effect of wind and ISA deviation.
Flying on economic cruise schedule the operator will minimize the
Cash Operational Cost of the cruise phase for a given cost index.
TIME RELATED COSTS

COST INDEX =
FUEL COST
Cost vs. Mach
Total costs
Cost
Time related costs
Fuel related costs
Min. fuel mach Min. cost mach
Mach
IN-FLIGHT PROFILE
GROUND OPERATIONS
APU use on ground

Considering an average aviation fuel price of US$ 1.70/Gal, the cost of
APU energy is many times greater than GPUs expenditure. From a
fuel conservation point of view, it is far better to use a GPU as an
electrical power source when the airplane is parked.
GP-1999
GP
REVISION 2 Page 23
PUBLICATION
However, operators should verify if APU continuous use at the gate

instead of GPU is the best option, considering:
• APU main components fail by cycle;
• APU may provide pneumatic pressure to the packs on the
ground when no other sources are available (such as external
air carts);
• GPU power is sometimes leased from handling companies
and may be charged by the hour.
When continuous APU ground use is a choice, it is recommended
that, whenever possible, APU usage time be minimized. It should be
shutdown after engines start and start up only after landing.
For ground and in-flight APU consumption information, refer to AOMs
Flight Planning section.
Air Conditioning use on the ground

The pneumatic air supplied by the APU may be used for air
conditioning on the ground, when the airplane is parked. Considering
maximum electric and pneumatic loads on the ground, the APU fuel
flow is 2.4 kg/min. With maximum electrical load only, the fuel flow
decreases to 1.7 kg/min.
In a typical 30-min turn around time, if using APU with maximum
electrical load only, 21 kg (46 lb) of fuel per ground stop can be saved
when comparing with pneumatic and electrical supply operation.
GP-1999
GP
Page 24 REVISION 2
PUBLICATION
APU Operations on the ground only with electrical load means:
786,000 kg fuel economy ~ US$ 440,000.00 potential savings

Operators should evaluate the cost of use external air source, since
this may not be provided at all airports or, when available, may be rent
by local handling companies.
TAXI
Taxi should be performed at idle thrust whenever possible, minimizing
fuel consumption. Taxi fuel flow in idle thrust is approximately 8 kg/min
or 480 kg/h.
Taxi time should be minimized at all times.
Avoid high speeds and high thrust settings during taxi. For speeds
below 30 kt and applying thrust above 40% N1, there is a possibility of
an induced vortex build-up at engine’s inlet. This may lead to exhaust
gas and FOD ingestion, increasing the ITT.
Single Engine Taxi

A single engine start can be applied in order to save fuel, delaying the
start of the second engine prior to takeoff or shutting one engine after
landing when taxiing in. Some considerations should be given to
evaluate the feasibility of this procedure, such as:
• Ramp weight: heavier airplane demand more power;
• Ramp gradient: positive ramp gradients that demand more
power;
• Taxi time to active runway;
• Engine warm up and cooling down period;
• Higher crew workload.
The start of the second engine should preferably be performed with
the airplane static since engine start while taxiing may lead to higher
Pilot workload.
GP-1999
GP
REVISION 2 Page 25
PUBLICATION
On single engine taxi, the fuel flow is approximately 5 kg/min or

300 kg/h, due to an increment on thrust compared to normal taxi thrust
per engine.
For more information refer to AOMs Normal Procedures section.
One Engine Shutdown after Landing

After landing, the recommended engine-cooling period must be
observed prior to engine shutdown.
Following high power operation, such as use of maximum reverse
thrust, it is recommended that the engine be kept running at idle at
least 2 minutes to permit engine thermal stabilization prior to engine
shutdown.
TAKEOFF
Reduced Thrust Use

Derated thrust and assumed temperature methods are the approved
operational procedures employed to provide reduced thrust takeoffs.
The main benefits in using reduced thrust are related to extending
engine’s life. It provides lower ITTs, less severe rotor speeds and
internal pressures, leading to lower:
• ITT deterioration rate, increasing time-on-wing;
• Fuel flow deterioration rates, producing lower TSFC
degradation;
• Maintenance costs reduced shop visit rate and cost per shop
visit.
Furthermore, on a given takeoff, it reduces engine stress level and
probability of a failure.
Considering fuel conservation aspects, reduced takeoff will burn
slightly more fuel once less thrust is used. It means that lower rates of
climb are provided until reaching second segment and more time is
spent at higher fuel flows.
Nonetheless, operators should carefully evaluate this statement since
engine maintenance costs will probably surpass extra fuel burn cost.
For example, consider an EMBRAER 170 FLAPS 2 takeoff, with TOW
33600 kg (74000 lb), at ISA conditions MSL and all engines operating.
GP-1999
GP
Page 26 REVISION 2
PUBLICATION
The next table shows the difference between TO-1 and TO-2 (10%
thrust reduction at sea level) for the CF34-8E5 engines:
Time to Acceleration Altitude from 35 ft screen height

All engines operating/Flaps 2
Flaps Retraction Altitude (ft) 400 ft 1000 ft
TO-1 6.7 sec 16.7 sec
TO-2 7.6 sec 20.0 sec
Difference 0.9 sec 2.3 sec
Extra Fuel Burned (kg) 1 kg 3 kg
Using TO-2 thrust for all takeoffs and considering the typical
operational scenario, 112320 kg (247400 lb) of extra fuel will be
burned after one year if retracting flaps at 1000 ft or US$ 63,000.00 of
extra cost. Should flaps be retracted at 400 ft, this extra cost dwindles
to US$ 21,000.00 in a year.
When considering the assumed temperature method, thrust reduction
is limited to 25% of the maximum takeoff thrust. At this limit, an
increase in the order of 50% of this extra fuel is expected.
Check the Propulsion Section of this publication for more detailed
information.
Takeoff Flaps Selection

Lower flap selections will provide lower fuel consumption on takeoffs.
The EMBRAER 170/190 Family has excellent field performance even
with lower flap selections (1 and 2).
Consider selecting FLAPS 4 for takeoffs in the following cases:
• Takeoff is clearly limited by field length: non-obstacle/climb
limited takeoff and field length less than 2000 m;
• Poor runway pavement conditions (avoiding damage of the
tires and airplane structure or minimizing FOD ingestion).
Takeoffs using FLAPS 4 will burn approximately 145 kg (320 lb) of
fuel, up to 1500 ft AGL.
GP-1999
GP
REVISION 2 Page 27
PUBLICATION
If using FLAPS 1 or 2, this reduces fuel burn by 10 kg to 20 kg (22 lb

to 44 lb) on each takeoff, depending on field length, temperature and
elevation.
Flaps Retraction Altitude
Acceleration Altitude
The higher the flaps retraction altitude (beginning of the 3rd segment),
the higher the fuel consumption during the takeoff path.
The minimum flaps retraction altitude is the lowest value that can be
used for acceleration and flaps retraction and is defined by each
regulation (for example: FAA requires 400 ft and JAA/EASA requires
800 ft). This value is selectable in the TAKEOFF ANALYSIS program.
If obstacles along the takeoff flight path require higher altitudes in
order to meet regulatory clearance requirements, the software also
automatically increases this altitude.
Considering all engines operating, the fuel consumption difference
between retracting flaps at 400 ft instead of 1000 ft is 10 kg to 13 kg
(22 lb to 27 lb). Under a one engine inoperative scenario, this
difference may raise to 30 kg (66 lb).
Some operators employ a higher minimum flaps retraction altitude
setting that which is higher than required, for example 1000 ft.
CLIMB
The climb phase has a significant impact on fuel consumption when
considering short and medium range flights since it represents 20% to
40% of the trip time, registering fuel flows 40% greater than on cruise
phase.
When considering trip fuel, the climb phase shall not be analyzed
separately. The impact over the total trip fuel is the best way to check
a climb schedule.
GP-1999
GP
Page 28 REVISION 2
PUBLICATION
Embraer provides information in the AOMs Flight Planning section for

Maximum Climb Angle, Maximum Rate of Climb and recommended
Standard Speed Schedule.
High Speed Climb

Climbing using high speeds above 10000 ft will produce additional fuel
burn. Although cruise distance is decreased, the average trip fuel is
increased since lower rates of climb are provided.
The following chart shows the trip fuel differences when using
320 KIAS/M 0.80 climb schedule above 10000 ft, compared with the
standard profile.
EXPECTED FUEL BURN INCREASE OF CLIMBING WITH 320 KIAS/M 0.80

INSTEAD OF STANDARD CLIMB SCHEDULE (290 KIAS/M 0.70)
7.0%
6.5%
6.0%
5.5%
5.0%
E170
4.5% E175
4.0% E190
3.5%
E195
3.0%
2.5%
2.0%
1.5%
1.0%
500 600 700 800 900 1000
TRIP DISTANCE (NM)
GP-1999
GP
REVISION 2 Page 29
PUBLICATION
Considering the Typical Operational Scenario:
CLIMBING WITH 320 KIAS/M 0.80 MEANS:

AIRPLANE
(kg) (US$)
EMBRAER 170 4600000 2,575,000.00
EMBRAER 175 5600000 3,135,000.00
EMBRAER 190 3840000 2,150,000.00
EMBRAER 195 4040000 2,261,000.00

Climb Thrust Selection

The CF34 Engines have two modes of climb thrust:
• CLB-1: Maximum Available Climb Thrust;
• CLB-2: Reduced Climb Thrust at sea level, corresponding to
approximately 90% of Maximum Climb Thrust at sea level.
The difference between CLB-1 and CLB-2 decreases with altitude.
The CLB-1 mode provides higher rates of climb and, consequently,
the airplane will spend less time to reach a desired altitude when
compared with CLB-2 thrust. As a result, considering fuel conservation
aspects, the CLB-1 mode would produce the lowest trip fuel burn.
The impact of using CLB-2 instead of CLB-1 on trip fuel is shown in
the following chart. Consider the Typical Operational Profile using
CLB-1 thrust for climb:
GP-1999
GP
Page 30 REVISION 2
PUBLICATION
EXPECTED FUEL BURN INCREASE OF CLIMBING WITH

CLB-2 MODE INSTEAD OF CLB-1 MODE
0.90%
0.85%
0.80%
0.75%
0.70% E170
0.65% E175
0.60% E190
E195
0.55%
0.50%
0.45%
0.40%
0.35%
0.30%
500 600 700 800 900 1000
TRIP DISTANCE (NM)
It must be said that the main benefit in using reduced climb is related
to maintenance costs. Using reduced climb, the engine will work at
cooler temperatures, thus minimizing deterioration of engine
components.
This will lead to:
• Reduced maintenance costs;
• Lower Thrust Specific Fuel Consumption (TSFC)
deterioration;
• Longer periods between shop visits (wing removal for
maintenance).
Each operator must evaluate the trade-offs of maintenance costs and
TSFC impact versus trip fuel impact.
GP-1999
GP
REVISION 2 Page 31
PUBLICATION
CRUISE SPEED MANAGEMENT

Speed variations above the planned speeds may lead to significant
trip fuel burn.
Speed measure has a large impact on specific range.
The crew should ensure, during walk around that the smart probes
delimited area is clean and free of obstructions, so that it may provide
correct speed, Mach number and TAT calculations.
The impact of flying M 0.01 above the planned cruise speed is:
EXPECTED FUEL BURN INCREASE OF FLYING WITH

M 0.01 FASTER THAN PLANNED CRUISE SPEED
0.70%
0.65%
0.60%
E170
0.55%
E175
0.50% E190
E195
0.45%
0.40%
0.35%
0.30%
500 600 700 800 900 1000
TRIP DISTANCE (NM)
GP-1999
GP
Page 32 REVISION 2
PUBLICATION
M 0.01 FASTER THAN PLANNED CRUISE SPEED MEANS:

AIRPLANE
(kg) (US$)
EMBRAER 170 487000 272,000.00
EMBRAER 175 450000 252,000.00
EMBRAER 190 524000 293,000.00
EMBRAER 195 487000 272,000.00

LATERAL NAVIGATION OPTIMIZATION

Lateral navigation has impact on trip fuel and time, and then on the
Cash Operational Cost of a flight. Deviations from planned lateral
navigation may occur due to ATC requirements or meteorological
conditions.
For example, consider a lateral flight path length only 1% longer than
that planned for the trip. For the EMBRAER 170/190 Family typical
flight speed schedule and optimum flight level, the following extra fuel
is found for different leg lengths:
EXPECTED FUEL BURN INCREASE OF

FLYING EXTRA 1% ON MISSION LENGTH
1.10%
1.05%
1.00%
E170
0.95%
E175
0.90% E190
E195
0.85%
0.80%
0.75%
0.70%
500 600 700 800 900 1000
TRIP DISTANCE (NM)
GP-1999
GP
REVISION 2 Page 33
PUBLICATION
During any flight, direct navigation to waypoints is recommended since

that has a significant impact in optimizing the flight. This should be
encouraged by employing the FMS since it incorporates the “Direct-to”
feature. Of course, all route shortcuts must always be coordinated with
ATC.
Route planning should always be performed considering the shortest
(and feasible) distance between origin and destination airports.
FLIGHT CONTROLS TRIMMING

A great contributor to fuel efficiency is airplane trimming and
understanding how the three-axis trim works is essential in this case.
The autopilot perfectly trims the airplane in pitch, but does not trim for
roll and yaw. What the autopilot does is simply apply control
displacements to compensate for roll and yaw tendencies, this action
normally going unnoticed by the Pilot.
Lateral trim is important because multifunction spoilers may open if a
large amount of roll is commanded by the autopilot in order to
compensate tendencies, thus increasing drag and fuel consumption.
The rule is: keeping the airplane trimmed at all times will
minimize drag increment, therefore reducing fuel consumption.
FUEL IMBALANCE MANAGEMENT

Even though an indicated fuel imbalance does not affect the ability of
the airplane to complete its scheduled flight, the required lateral trim to
maintain a wings level attitude increases fuel consumption due to an
increase in airplane drag.
The maximum allowed in-flight fuel imbalance is 360 kg (800 lb).
Under normal conditions, Pilots should monitor in-flight fuel imbalance
and schedule it to zero at all times by using the approved published
procedures in the AFM/AOM.
GP-1999
GP
Page 34 REVISION 2
PUBLICATION
HOLDING
Holding is a maneuver that should be performed at the minimum
consumption speed.
The holding tables for clean configuration are provided in the AOM’s
Flight Planning Section. They are calculated for the minimum fuel
consumption condition, further providing minimum maneuver margin of
1.27 g (EMBRAER 170/175) and 1.29 g (EMBRAER 190/195) above
stall speed or 210 KIAS under icing conditions.
Considering fuel conservation aspects, flying a holding pattern with
flaps extended should be avoided, since it significantly increases fuel
flow. For flaps 1, fuel flow increases by approximately 20%.
DESCENT
The descent phase has a less significant impact on fuel consumption
when compared with the climb phase. Considering short and medium
range flights, it represents 10% of the trip time, performing idle fuel
flows (or nearly so), 60% less than on cruise phase.
Considering fuel consumption aspects, less fuel is burned at higher
speeds once descent time becomes shorter. High-speed descents
produce higher rates of descent that increase the cabin’s pressure
rate of change. This may lead to passenger discomfort. Although
descent fuel is minimized at higher speeds, trip fuel consumption may
increase if using extremely high speeds, once the descent distance is
reduced and cruise distance is stretched.
In order to minimize fuel consumption, idle thrust is also
recommended during descent. Other descent methods that require
thrust application will increase descent fuel.
In order to balance fuel consumption with adequate cabin differential
pressure change rate, Embraer recommends the following standard
descent speed schedule:
• M 0.77 or 290 KIAS (whichever occurs first) above 10000 ft;
• 250 KIAS below 10000 ft.
GP-1999
GP
REVISION 2 Page 35
PUBLICATION
The following chart shows the trip fuel difference when comparing FPA
descent (3 deg and M 0.77/290 KIAS) with the standard descent
profile. The 250 KIAS speed restriction below 10000 ft is respected.
EXPECTED FUEL BURN INCREASE OF DESCENT WITH

3 DEG FLIGHT PATH ANGLE INSTEAD OF STANDARD SCHEDULE
0.80%
0.75%
0.70%
0.65%
0.60% E170
0.55% E175
0.50% E190
E195
0.45%
0.40%
0.35%
0.30%
0.25%
0.20%
500 600 700 800 900 1000
TRIP DISTANCE (NM)
DESCENT WITH 3 DEG FPA MEANS:

AIRPLANE
(kg) (US$)
EMBRAER 170 560000 314,000.00
EMBRAER 175 525000 294,000.00
EMBRAER 190 750000 420,000.00
EMBRAER 195 711000 398,000.00

GP-1999
GP
Page 36 REVISION 2
PUBLICATION
The following chart shows the trip fuel difference when comparing
M 0.80/320 KIAS descent with the standard descent profile. The
250 KIAS speed restriction below 10000 ft is respected.
EXPECTED FUEL BURN INCREASE OF DESCENT WITH

M 0.80/320 KIAS INSTEAD OF STANDARD DESCENT SCHEDULE
0.80%
0.75%
0.70%
0.65%
E170
0.60% E175
0.55% E190
E195
0.50%
0.45%
0.40%
0.35%
0.30%
500 600 700 800 900 1000
TRIP DISTANCE (NM)
DESCENT WITH M 0.80/320 KIAS MEANS:

AIRPLANE
(kg) (US$)
EMBRAER 170 636000 356,000.00
EMBRAER 175 600000 336,000.00
EMBRAER 190 674000 377,000.00
EMBRAER 195 666000 373,000.00

GP-1999
GP
REVISION 2 Page 37
PUBLICATION
SPEED RESTRICTIONS BELOW 10000 FT

Many existing worldwide operational regulations require the speed
limit of 250 KIAS below 10000 ft.
Considering fuel conservation aspects, the elimination of these speed
limits during both climb and descent phases may lead to trip fuel
savings from 14 to 25 kg (31 to 55 lb) per mission, the annual savings
are mentioned in the table below:
CLIMB AND DESCENT WITH 300 KIAS BELOW 10000 FT MEANS:

AIRPLANE
(kg) (US$)
EMBRAER 170 530000 296,000.00
EMBRAER 175 539000 300,000.00
EMBRAER 190 949000 530,000.00
EMBRAER 195 980000 548,000.00

The EMBRAER 170/190 Family was designed and flight tested for bird
impact and may fly with up to 300 KIAS below 10000 ft.
APPROACH AND LANDING

The fuel consumption in the approach phase is influenced by two main
factors:
• ATC requirements;
• Pilot’s flying techniques.
ATC requirements, such as accomplishing of the entire range of IFR
approach procedures and holdings are external factors that are a
function of airspace capacity and traffic flow management. They are
beyond flight crew control. In what regards flying techniques, some
factors may be evaluated:
Initial approach planning

Thrust should be maintained in idle as much as possible during the
approach. Level flight at a constant speed always requires thrust
application and shall not be performed unless necessary.
GP-1999
GP
Page 38 REVISION 2
PUBLICATION
Knowledge of the deceleration rates of the airplane is essential to

perform an optimum idle approach planning. The table below shows
the deceleration distances required for IDLE thrust, for speed brakes
up or down, with clean configuration:
1000 ft/min DESCENT

CONFIGURATION LEVELED FLIGHT
FLIGHT
SPEEDBRAKES DOWN 1 NM for each 10 kt 2 NM for each 10 kt

(STOWED) Speed reduction Speed reduction
SPEEDBRAKES UP 0.5 NM for each 10 kt 1 NM for each 10 kt

(DEPLOYED) Speed reduction Speed reduction
For example, deceleration from 250 KIAS to 200 KIAS requires 5 NM

in level flight or 10 NM while descending at 1000 ft/min with speed
brakes down (stowed).
Flaps and Gear extension

It is desirable to minimize the time spent under high drag
configuration. Thus, it is convenient to delay flaps and gear extension
as much as possible, but never extrapolating the stabilized approach
limits stated in the airline policy.
Fuel flow in landing configuration is 150% higher than in clean

configuration.
In order to optimize flaps life and fuel consumption, extend flaps on

the “green dot” speed. Approximately 8 NM are required to extend all
the flaps down to full position.
Considering a stabilized approach 5 NM from the threshold using flaps
FULL, 70 kg (154 lb) of fuel is burned from the beginning of the
approach (first flap extension).
Flaps Choice
Considering a flaps 5 landing, 10 kg less fuel is burned when
compared with flaps FULL. Considering fuel conservation aspects, it is
desirable to land with flaps 5 whenever possible.
GP-1999
GP
REVISION 2 Page 39
PUBLICATION
It is recommended to use FULL flaps only where field limit is

significant. For flaps 5, the table below shows the minimum field
lengths for the maximum landing weight at DRY runway and no ice
encounter.
FLAPS 5 – MINIMUM FIELD LENGTH
AIRPLANE MSL 5000 ft

EMBRAER 170 1350 m (4430 ft) 1500 m (4920 ft)
EMBRAER 175 1380 m (4515 ft) 1550 m (5080 ft)
EMBRAER 190 1460 m (4790 ft) 1630 m (5340 ft)
EMBRAER 195 1540 m (5052 ft) 1710 m (5610 ft)
MISSED APPROACHES
Although flap and gear extension delay is desirable, operators shall
emphasize the Stabilized Approach Policy, in order to avoid premature
go-around. For the EMBRAER 170/190 Family, a go-around burns
approximately 145 kg (320 lb) of fuel.
REVERSE THRUST
Reverse thrust is effective at higher speeds, since it needs air mass to
produce the necessary air brake forces.
Applying reverse thrust at lower speeds increase the chance for
potential reverse flows or inlet vortex, increasing the possibility of
exhaust gas ingestion and FOD ingestion. This can occur below 80
KIAS.
Moreover, fuel flow with full reverse thrust is similar to takeoff thrust,
reaching 3200 kg/h for both engines.
Keeping full reverse thrust actuated until airplane stops

completely will increase approach and landing fuel by 10 kg.
Thus, reverse thrust time should be optimized. It is suggested that, at

60 KIAS it should be canceled in such way that it will be completely
stowed when reaching normal taxi speed. This procedure minimizes
the possibility of exhaust gas ingestion and FOD on lower speeds.
GP-1999
GP
Page 40 REVISION 2
PUBLICATION
SUMMARY
Considering everything stated above, it should be noted that small
quantities of fuel saved during a flight might seem insignificant when
evaluated separately, but have a huge impact when looking at annual
costs of a fleet.
1% fuel savings are easily reached when applying relatively

simple operational procedures during day-to-day operations.
GP-1999
GP
REVISION 2 Page 41
PUBLICATION
The next tables summarize the annual fuel and money increase for the
most significant factors stated above, considering the Typical
Operational Profile:
EMBRAER 170 FUEL PENALTIES TABLE

TRIP FUEL ANNUAL APROX ANNUAL
ITEM INCREASE EXTRA EXTRA COST
kg % FUEL (kg) (US$)
Increase of each 100 NM on

16 0.60% 580000 325,000.00
alternate distance.
Increase of 200 kg on FOB
9 0.35% 337000 189,000.00
required.
Increase of considering extra
500 kg on Zero Fuel Weight in 2 0.08% 74900 42,000.00
Flight Planning calculation.
High speed climb 320 KIAS/
123 4.79% 4600000 2,575,000.00
M 0.80 above 10000 ft.
Flying 2000 ft below optimum
52 2.05% 1900000 1,060,000.00
altitude.
Cruising M 0.01 faster than
13 0.51% 487000 273,000.00
planned.
VMO/MMO descent instead of

17 0.66% 636000 356,000.00
Standard Descent.
3 degree FPA instead of Standard

17 0.66% 560000 314,000.00
Descent.
APU Operations on ground with
electrical and pneumatic load 21 0.82% 786000 440,000.00
instead of electrical load only.
Use of flaps 4 as standard in all

20 0.78% 749000 420,000.00
takeoffs.
Use fixed flaps retraction altitude

10 0.39% 374400 210,000.00
1000 ft instead of optimum.
Use of Full Flaps on Landing. 10 0.39% 374400 210,000.00
Use of Full Reverse thrust until

10 0.39% 374400 210,000.00
complete stop of the airplane.
TOTAL 320 12.47% 11,833,100 6,624,000.00

GP-1999
GP
Page 42 REVISION 2
PUBLICATION

TRIP FUEL ANNUAL ANNUAL

18 0.69% 670000 375,000.00
alternate distance.
10 0.36% 355000 199,000.00
required.
150 5.74% 5600000 3,135,000.00
M 0.80 above 10000 ft.
29 1.13% 1090000 610,000.00
altitude.
12 0.47% 450000 252,000.00
planned.

16 0.61% 600000 336,000.00
Standard Descent.

16 0.61% 525000 294,000.00
Descent.

20 0.77% 749000 420,000.00
takeoffs.

10 0.38% 374400 210,000.00

10 0.38% 374400 210,000.00
TOTAL 324 12.41% 12,023,100 6,733,000.00

GP-1999
GP
REVISION 2 Page 43
PUBLICATION


18 0.58% 686000 384,000.00
alternate distance.
8 0.25% 300000 168,000.00
required.
103 3.25% 3840000 2,150,000.00
M 0.80 above 10000 ft.
37 1.21% 1385000 780,000.00
altitude.
14 0.45% 524000 293,000.00
planned.

18 0.57% 674000 377,000.00
Standard Descent.

20 0.64% 750000 420,000.00
Descent.

20 0.63% 749000 420,000.00
takeoffs.

10 0.32% 374400 210,000.00

10 0.32% 374400 210,000.00
TOTAL 290 9.24% 10,854,700 6,083,000.00

GP-1999
GP
Page 44 REVISION 2
PUBLICATION

ITEM INCREASE EXTRA FUEL EXTRA COST
kg % (kg) (US$)

21 0.63% 863000 483,000.00
alternate distance.
9 0.28% 340000 190,000.00
required.
108 3.50% 4040000 2,610,000.00
M 0.80 above 10000 ft.
37 1.14% 1385000 780,000.00
altitude.
13 0.40% 487000 272,000.00
planned.
18 0.55% 666000 373,000.00
Standard Descent.
3 degree FPA instead of
19 0.65% 711000 398,000.00
Standard Descent.
20 0.63% 749000 420,000.00
takeoffs.
Use fixed flaps retraction
altitude 1000 ft instead of 10 0.32% 374400 210,000.00
optimum.
10 0.32% 374400 210,000.00
TOTAL 298 9.44% 11,206,800 6,627,000.00
GP-1999
GP
REVISION 2 Page 45
PUBLICATION
SECTION III – AIRPLANE SYSTEMS
PROPULSION SYSTEM
The trip fuel burn is directly related with the proper maintenance and
operation of the engines.
Severity of operation is the key factor to understand engines

deterioration. Jet engines are turbo machines where air is submitted to
extremely high ranges of temperatures and pressures in order to
produce the desired thrust. Temperatures in the order of 900 °C and
more are expected through some components, such as high-pressure
turbines.
Higher temperatures mean higher levels of stress and then

accelerated wearing of components. Erosion of moving parts and
airfoil shape changes are examples of such deterioration.
GP-1999
GP
Page 46 REVISION 2
PUBLICATION
The deterioration of engine performance shows as an ITT upward

trend for a given thrust, especially when thrust is high, such as during
takeoff and climb. The figures below show the effect of the average
takeoff thrust on the measured cruise ITT, fuel flow and cycles to shop
visits. They clearly show the impact on engine performance when
using higher thrust ratings.
CRUISE ITT
ITT
Deterioration
Rate
AVG Static Takeoff Thrust Rating
CRUISE FUEL FLOW
FF
Deterioration
Rate
AVG Static Takeoff Thrust Rating
CYCLES TO SHOP VISIT

Increasing
Cycles to
Shop Visit
SL Static Takeoff Thrust Rating

GP-1999
GP
REVISION 2 Page 47
PUBLICATION
Embraer recommends the use of reduced takeoff and climb thrust in

order to reduce the deterioration of engines TSFC and extend “on
wing” time.
The following “design” deterioration rates on ITT and TSFC are
expected when using TO-1 or TO-2 on CF34 engines:
CF34 Deterioration rates (per 1000 cycles)
Thrust rating ITT TSFC
TO-1 3.1 oC 0.22%
TO-2 2.2 oC 0.15%

This means that if an average thrust reduction of 10% is used on
takeoff and climb:
For every 1000 cycles, the expected fuel consumption increase is

reduced by approximately 0.07%.
THRUST SPECIFIC CONSUMPTION (TSFC)

The Thrust Specific Fuel Consumption (TSFC) is the parameter that is
commonly used to measure engine fuel burn performance. It is
defined as the ratio “Fuel Flow to Net Thrust” produced and shows
how efficiently the engine converts thermal energy from fuel to net
thrust.
The lower the TSFC, the more efficient the engine is. Loss of net
thrust and higher fuel flows for a given N1 are indicators of engine
performance deterioration and mean higher TSFC values.
GP-1999
GP
Page 48 REVISION 2
PUBLICATION
One percent deterioration on TSFC, assuming the same thrust

required, means a 1.01% increase in fuel flow. The impact of this
deterioration on trip fuel is shown in the following chart:

1% TSFC DETERIORATION
1.11%
1.09%
INCREASE (%)
(%)
1.07%
FUEL INCREASE
E170
1.05%
E175
1.03% E190
E195
TRIP FUEL
1.01%
TRIP
0.99%
0.97%
0.95%
500 600 700 800 900 1000
TRIP DISTANCE (NM)
1% TSFC DETERIORATION MEANS:

AIRPLANE
(kg) (US$)
EMBRAER 170 1010880 570,000.00
EMBRAER 175 1048320 590,000.00
EMBRAER 190 1179360 660,000.00
EMBRAER 195 1235520 691,000.00

GP-1999
GP
REVISION 2 Page 49
PUBLICATION
The major causes of TSFC deterioration are:

• Erosion, oxidation and wear of engine moving parts, changing
the aerodynamic shape and blade tip clearances. They
represent approximately 45% of the total TSFC deterioration;
• Accumulation of dirt or debris along airflow path (moving or
static parts);
• Increased engine internal seal clearances due to erosion and
rubbing represent approximately 20% of the TSFC
deterioration;
• Leakages in joints and seal surfaces represent approximately
5% of the TSFC deterioration;
• Changing engine electronic control (FADEC) fuel trimming
parameters, through software or hardware changes.
Maintenance Tasks used for Reduction of TSFC Deterioration

The prevention of TSFC deterioration is performed with a set of
preventive maintenance tasks “on wings” that address all potential
sources of deterioration. Chapter 72 of the AMM presents TSFC
recovery common tasks, such as:
• Directions for cleaning fan blades, fan spinners, OGVs and
cowlings;
• “On-wing” inspections to detect dirt accumulation, surfaces
obstructions and overall engine conditions;
• Boroscopic inspections scheduled by the maintenance plan or
when FOD occurs.
Also, consider tradeoff between airplane downtime and decreasing
interval between engine compressor water wash. Water wash helps
maintain engine efficiency, reduces fuel burn and may increase ITT
margin. Embraer recommends carrying an engine compressor water
wash for the following conditions:
• On every airplane A-check inspection interval and every
A-check thereafter. The frequency can be increased or
decreased, as necessary;
• Do this procedure more often if the engine is operated in a
polluted environment. Otherwise, the dirt becomes difficult to
remove;
GP-1999
GP
Page 50 REVISION 2
PUBLICATION
• Do this cleaning if engine performance becomes worse, as

shown by an average increased differential in ITT of 15ºC
(27ºF);
• Do this cleaning if the fan blades, fan vanes, or static seal (aft
of the fan blade platform) have collected carbon, dirt, salt, or
oil-based material, as shown by visual inspection of the
engine inlet;
• Monitor those airplanes that have been de-iced one or more
times, and that have operated in airports where there is a high
probability that the de-icing fluid can be ingested into the
engines.
Engine Trend Monitoring

The source to determine the deterioration level of the engine’s TSFC
is the Engine Trend Monitoring Software. Using this tool, the
recognition of ITT margin loss may anticipate TSFC recovery
maintenance tasks and thus minimize fuel consumption increments.
Embraer recommends the download of engine data for engine trend
analysis not exceeding 100 flights in order to accumulate reliable
statistical data.
OPERATIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS
Throttle Technique
Momentary exposure to very high temperatures, such as rapid and
wide thrust variations, lead to high ITT peaks and stress engines
components.
Avoid rapid throttle movements. This may cause turbine tip rubbing
due to thermal expansion differences between engine components.
Rubbing increases turbine tip clearances, reducing fuel efficiency and
increasing ITT deterioration.
Erosive FOD Prevention

Erosive foreign particles laying on pavement surfaces can significantly
damage engine components, as they may be ingested due to heavy
suction produced at the intakes, even at idle thrust.
GP-1999
GP
REVISION 2 Page 51
PUBLICATION
The presence of erosive FOD sources through engine air path will
damage airfoils resulting in reduced ITT margin and increased fuel
consumption. Other effects may arise such as:
• Reduced part life;
• Reduced airfoil strength (extreme case);
• Reduced stall margin (extreme case);
• Reducing cooling flow passages;
• Higher temperatures at hot section parts.
Some common erosive FOD sources are:
• Sand, gravel, ice, snow, and slush, metal pieces, volcanic ash
and deteriorated pavement;
• Airborne particles (dust, sand, volcanic ash);
• Contaminated runways.
Potential FOD areas should be avoided by the Pilots whenever
possible, such as:
• Construction activity;
• Deteriorated runways/ramps/taxiways;
• Narrow taxiways;
• Ramps/taxiways sanded for winter operations;
• Plowed snow/sand beside runways/taxiways.
Operations at coastal or desert airports should be performed with
caution, in order to prevent early TSFC degradation due to constant
sand/salt particles ingestion.
A common cause of FOD on the ground is the vortex build up at the
engine intakes, always present when the airplane is taxiing. It is
observed that their strength increases at high thrusts and low
airspeeds.
GP-1999
GP
Page 52 REVISION 2
PUBLICATION
Inlet vortex can be dissipated by increasing airspeed or by turning the

airplane towards a strong headwind. Some general rules can be
applied:
• 10 kt headwind will destroy vortices formed up to 40% N1;
• 30 kt airspeed will destroy vortices formed at typical takeoff
thrust settings.
Some operational procedures lead to rapid build up of heavy intake
vortex. Attention to erosive FODs should be given to the following kind
of operations:
• Use of high thrust to breakaway from stopped position;
• 180º turns on runway: overhang of unprepared surface and
thrust assist in turn from outboard engine;
• Thrust advance for static takeoff;
• Reverse thrust at low airspeed: debris propelled forward and
ingested in engine;
• Full thrust assurance run up on aprons and taxiways.
In summary, Embraer recommends the following FOD ingestion
policy:
• Avoid engine overhang of unprepared surface (If unavoidable,
leave engines at idle thrust as long as possible);
• Minimize breakaway thrust: Less than 40% N1, if possible.
• Minimize taxi thrust: Prevent airplane from coming to complete
a stop (Requires less thrust to keep moving than to
breakaway from a stopped position);
• Use reverse during taxi only for emergency stopping or when
extremely necessary.
GP-1999
GP
REVISION 2 Page 53
PUBLICATION
REDUCED THRUST
As stated previously, the use of reduced takeoff and climb thrust
allows a less severe operation due to lower rotor speeds,
temperatures and internal pressures. Less severe operation means
lower:
• Fuel flow degradation rate, reducing fuel burn over the on-
wing life of engine;
• Inter Turbine Temperature (ITT) degradation rate (Increases
time-on-wing);
• Maintenance costs, reducing shop visit rate and cost per shop
visit.
And, last but not least, reduced thrust minimizes engine stress and the
probability of a failure during critical phases, such as takeoffs.
CF34-8E5 Engine Parameters
(TO-1 Full Thrust Versus TO-2 Full Thrust)
Sea Level Static, Flat Rate Temperature of 30 °C, ECS Off, Typical New Engine
TO-1 Full Rated TO-2 Full Rated

Delta
Thrust Thrust
Thrust (lbf) 13276 12133 -8.6%
N1 (rpm) 6776 6552 -3.3%
N2 (rpm) 16564 16323 -1.5%
ITT (°C) 908 866 -4.6%

(TO-1 Full Thrust Versus TO-2 Full Thrust)
Sea Level Static, OAT of 15 °C, ECS ON, Typical New Engine
TO-1 Full Rated TO-2 Full Rated

Delta
Thrust Thrust
Thrust (lbf) 17225 15502 -10.0%
N1 (rpm) 5557 5356 -4.0%
N2 (rpm) 16883 16655 -1.4%
ITT (°C) 799 760 -4.9%

GP-1999
GP
Page 54 REVISION 2
PUBLICATION
ASSUMED TEMPERATURE METHOD

This method may be combined with derated takeoff thrust in order to
provide larger thrust reductions and thus reducing severity of
operations.
In order to avoid thrust increase when selecting a climb mode after
takeoff, the takeoff thrust is never reduced below CLB-2+X% thrust
when selected a FLEX temperature on MCDU TRS page.
The value of X% is function of the takeoff thrust mode selected and
OAT in such way that the regulatory limit of 25% thrust reduction is
never exceeded. The Maximum Thrust considered in these
calculations is the reserve thrust for the selected takeoff mode.
The maximum assumed temperature presented in the AOM takeoff
section is designed using this criterion.
The tables below show the difference of engine’s parameters using
flex temperature for a selected takeoff mode.

(TO-1 Full Versus TO-1 FLEX Thrust)
TO-1 Full Rated TO-1 Flex Temp 38 °C

Delta
Thrust Thrust
Thrust (lbf) 13276 12130 -8.6%
N1 (rpm) 6776 6552 -3.3%
N2 (rpm) 16564 16322 -1.5%
ITT (°C) 908 865 -4.7%


Delta
Thrust Thrust
Thrust (lbf) 12133 10885 -10.5%
N1 (rpm) 6552 6279 -4.2%
N2 (rpm) 16323 16036 -1.8%
ITT (°C) 866 821 -5.2%

GP-1999
GP
REVISION 2 Page 55
PUBLICATION

Sea Level Static, OAT of 15 °C, ECS ON, Typical New Engine
Delta
Thrust Thrust
Thrust (lbf) 17225 14600 -15.2%
N1 (rpm) 5557 5243 -5.7%
N2 (rpm) 16883 16531 -2.1%
ITT (°C) 799 740 -7.4%
Additional reductions are produced when combining derated thrust

with the assumed temperature method. The table below shows the
effect of combining derated thrust with flexible temperature method for
CF34 Engines.
(TO-1 Full Versus TO-2 Reduced Thrust)
Delta
Thrust Thrust
Thrust (lbf) 13276 10865 -18.2%
N1 (rpm) 6776 6279 -7.3%
N2 (rpm) 16564 16036 -3.2%
ITT (°C) 908 821 -9.6%
CLIMB THRUST
CLB-2 thrust is approximately 10% less than CLB-1 at sea level. As
the airplane climbs, this difference decreases.
When in-flight, the Pilot may select either CLB-1 or CLB-2 modes. The
climb tables provided in the AOM Flight Planning section are related to
CLB-1 mode.
Using CLB-2 thrust on climb will reduce maintenance costs and TSFC
deterioration but to a lesser degree than reduced thrust takeoff.
GP-1999
GP
Page 56 REVISION 2
PUBLICATION
The following graph shows the tendency of severity reduction, as

function of average derate:
Estimated Severity Reduction

Climb Thrust x Takeoff Thrust
Estimated T/O
Severity
Reduction
%
CLB
0 5 10 15 20 25
Average Derate Thrust - %
Each operator should evaluate maintenance costs and TSFC impact

tradeoffs versus trip fuel impact. Refer to Operations Section of this
document in order to check the impact of CLB-2 on trip fuel.
GP-1999
GP
REVISION 2 Page 57
PUBLICATION
SUMMARY
Fuel saving is just one aspect of economical engine operation. The
most effective method to save fuel is to prevent excessive TSFC
deterioration that can be achieved through operational procedures
such as:
• Erosive FOD prevention;
• Throttle technique;
• Reduced thrust use.
Reduction of TSFC deterioration also means less frequent shop visits
and longer engine time “on wings”. The Engine Trend Monitoring
Software is the most effective tool used to monitor engine
performance and directs adequate preventive maintenance actions.
Embraer recommends the use of reduced takeoff and climb

thrust in order to minimize TSFC degradation and achieve the
predicted “on wing” target of 10000 cycles.
GP-1999
GP
Page 58 REVISION 2
PUBLICATION
AERODYNAMICS
Airplanes are designed to have a higher lift over drag ratio in order to
accomplish its design mission. The lower the drag, the less thrust is
required to keep the airplane flying properly, which leads to lower fuel
consumption. This also means increased specific ranges and longer
flights.
The airplane consists of an aerodynamic body, fuselage, wing,
stabilizers and control surfaces, aside surface distortions or
interruptions such as antennas, actuator fairings, external doublers,
scuff plates, skin waviness, panel joints and control surfaces
interfaces.
Therefore, to gauge true airplane performance, efforts must be made
to evaluate drag penalties throughout the airplane. This study of drag
penalties is performed with the aid of wind tunnel tests and theoretical
models that also examine the airplane’s parts separately. When the
manufacturer delivers the airplane to the operator, every drag factor is
well known and the performance data is exactly predicted in the
AFM/AOM.
GP-1999
GP
REVISION 2 Page 59
PUBLICATION
But, other undetermined drag penalties may arise through the years,
when the airplane is subjected to line operations. Deviations from
“book performance” may possibly be caused by various surface
distortions, such as:
• Mismatched doors and windows;
• Mismatched access panels;
• Mismatched rivets;
• Leaking seals and aerodynamic sealing;
• Skin roughness;
• Substituted paint;
• Out-of-rigging control surfaces;
• Mechanical wear and improperly executed surface repair; and
• Out-of-rig surfaces.
These drag penalties shall be treated by the correct maintenance
practices and are supposed to be controlled after some years.
The impact of 1% drag degradation is shown in the following chart:

1% DRAG DEGRADATION
1.11%
1.09%
(%)
INCREASE (%)
1.07%
FUEL INCREASE
E170
1.05%
E175
1.03% E190
E195
TRIP FUEL
1.01%
TRIP
0.99%
0.97%
0.95%
500 600 700 800 900 1000
TRIP DISTANCE (NM)
GP-1999
GP
Page 60 REVISION 2
PUBLICATION
Considering the Typical Operational Scenario:
1% DRAG DEGRADATION MEANS:

AIRPLANE
(kg) (US$)
EMBRAER 170 1000000 560,000.00
EMBRAER 175 1030000 577,000.00
EMBRAER 190 1180000 660,000.00
EMBRAER 195 1198080 670,000.00

For every 1% of drag degradation, a fuel penalty of approximately

0.8% to 0.95% is expected, depending on operational conditions such
as weights, speeds and environmental conditions.
SENSITIVITY AREAS
The amount of fuel penalty is directly affected by location of items on
the airplane. The more the local pressure gradient changes, the more
variations of local aerodynamic parameters are to be expected. Other
aspects like boundary layer thickness and local airspeeds are also
important and may significantly influence local drag accretion.
High sensitivity areas are those submitted to higher local airspeeds,
many times, near to but not less than sonic speed. Generally they
have very thin turbulent boundary layers and high adverse pressure
gradients. Some examples of this kind of area are:
• Wings;
• Flaps and Slats;
• Spoilers;
• Ailerons.
Surface distortions in these components may lead to significant
increment of the overall drag of the airplane because they may lead to
flow separation, thus abruptly increasing drag penalties.
Low sensibility areas have thicker boundary layers and are submitted
to lower speeds smoothly local flow conditions. Their influence on
overall airplane drag is lower, but not less important.
GP-1999
GP
REVISION 2 Page 61
PUBLICATION
PARASITE DRAG INFLUENCE

The parasite drag represents approximately 10% of the total drag and
is the one drag item that can be controlled and reduced through
preventive maintenance methods.
Some preventive maintenance tasks are designed to prevent and
control drag degradation with these items. Some examples are listed
in the table below:
AMM
ITEM TASK
Chapter
27-03-02-Flight Control Module Rigging
27-13-02-Aileron Surface Position Rigging
FLIGHT
CONTROLS
27 27-20-00-Rudder Surface Rigging
27-30-00-Elevator Surface Rigging
27-80-00-Slat Control System Rigging
51-24-03-Internal/Internal Surface Finishing/Cleaning
STRUCTURES 51
51-24-08-Mirror Finished Aluminum Skin Polishing/Cleaning
DRAG INDEX
The CAFM, INFLIGHT PERFORMANCE SOFTWARE and ROUTE
ANALYSIS SOFTWARE may calculate performance deviations from
any additional drag configuration using a parameter called Drag Index.
This is a number associated to each drag penalty and is provided by
Embraer after aerodynamic analysis of the related configuration. This
is a useful tool when considering MMEL/CDL deviations, zero value
corresponds to a non-drag degradation condition.
GP-1999
GP
Page 62 REVISION 2
PUBLICATION
The following chart shows the impact of the Drag Index on Trip Fuel
only for the Typical Operating Profile.
EXPECTED FUEL BURN INCREASE FROM

DRAG INDEX EFFECTS
28%
24%
20%
E170
16%
E175
E190
12%
E195
8%
4%
0%
0 50 100 150 200
DRAG INDEX
This chart is only a reference of the Drag Index effects for a given
mission, for better results of the penalties of each Drag Index refer to
Embraer performance software’s.
MMEL/CDL DEVIATIONS
Embraer provides information regarding missing parts and it’s Drag
Index, if applicable, on AOMs Configuration Deviation List (CDL)
section.
The Dispatch Deviations Procedures Manual (DDPM) also provides
Drag Index penalty for some MMEL inoperative items, if applicable.
EXTERNAL DIRT ACCUMULATION

Dirt accumulation along an airplane’s external surface removes energy
from the boundary layer airflow, increasing friction drag and thus
reducing specific range.
A very dirty airplane is estimated to produce a decrease of
approximately 0.1% in specific range. Approximately the same
magnitude of degradation is expected for bad surface conditions, such
as lack of painting layers or different roughness.
GP-1999
GP
REVISION 2 Page 63
PUBLICATION
Regular cleaning, polishing and washing requires only few hours of

maintenance work, and is far cheaper when compared with the impact
of having a dirty airplane throughout the year.
SUMMARY
EMBRAER 170/190 Family harmonizes the best aerodynamic concept
in its category with the inevitable surface distortions – like antennas
and external doublers – resulting in aerodynamic cleanliness.
Consider that, for the EMBRAER 170/190 Family, drag increments
due to missing parts are small when compared with other sources.
Isolated, they mean much less than 1% in trip fuel increment. Dirt
increments play a more important role in total drag, as well as surface
mismatches and air leaks.
But, over time, the effect of small degradations is cumulative and may
lead to significant additional fuel consumption after years of use. A
well-maintained airplane is expected to have 0.5% of drag degradation
after 10 years of use. An improperly maintained airplane may accrue
2% in 5 years or less.
The key factor in carrying-out drag control is the accomplishment of
the adequate maintenance actions prescribed in the AMM.
GP-1999
GP
Page 64 REVISION 2
PUBLICATION
ENVIRONMENTAL AND PNEUMATICS

The EMBRAER 170/190 Family ECS and pneumatic systems
operation and maintenance also have significant impact on fuel
consumption.
Every event that produces higher thermodynamic loads on the packs,
or a higher than normal pressurization air demand, will also require
higher bleed air extraction from the engines. Higher bleed
requirements mean more fuel consumption and degradation of the
specific range.
There are three main factors that may affect the bleed extraction via
ECS system:
• Leakages;
• System’s components failure and dispatch;
• Incorrect operation of the systems.
LEAKAGES
Fuel is lost if there is a pneumatic system leakage and cabin air
leakage. Costly pneumatic leakages can occur at different locations.
Manifolds, ducts and duct flanges, worn connector seals and valves
are susceptible to leakage, and the fuel penalty for such waste will
depend on the areas in which they occur, the magnitude of the loss,
the pressure supplied, and the size of the ducting/device.
Overboard leakages of pressurized compartments incur penalties not
only due to the unnecessary loss of bleed pressure, but also due to
the disruption of external airflow. Damage to door seals is the major
contributors in this case, sometimes requiring repair.
Detecting leakage of any kind should periodically be carried out, in
accordance with the related maintenance technical publications. Some
examples are the AMM chapters 36-11-04 (Engine Bleed Lines),
36-11-06 (Torque Motor Controller), 36-12-03 (APU Bleed Lines),
36-21-01 (APU Line Leak Detectors) and 36-21-02 (Bleed Lines Leak
Detectors).
GP-1999
GP
REVISION 2 Page 65
PUBLICATION
SYSTEM COMPONENTS OPERATION AND FAILURE

The AMS controller functional logic provides automatic control of
engine bleeds, APU bleed, ECS packs, recirculation fans, gasper fans
and anti-ice valves according to the airplane’s operational conditions.
The pack flows are regulated as a function of flight altitude.
Under normal operations, it is recommended to set all AMS system in
automatic configuration (push buttons pressed) in order to optimize air
management and thus minimize fuel consumption.
The EMBRAER 170/190 Family ECS and Pneumatic system is
designed in such ways that if a failure is detected in any component,
bleed or pack are automatically turned off at the onside ECS/BLEED
system. For example, a failure of the high stage valve will
automatically close the associated bleed valve.
The examples below show the impact of non-operative AMS
components on Fuel Consumption:
Bleed and Pack Valves

In case of PACK valve closed, the remaining PACK will switch to HI
mode operation to absorb the entire thermal load required. A 25%
increase on thermal load of the respective pack is expected.
Closing a bleed valve will relieve the bleed extraction from the affected
engine, decreasing fuel flow. A fuel flow decrease of about 20 kg/h in
the respective engine is expected in this case.
Nevertheless, flight with one PACK/BLEED inoperative is restricted to
31000 ft, which may increase trip fuel drastically. According to the
MMEL it is permitted to dispatch the airplane with one PACK/BLEED
inoperative for 10 consecutive days, but this altitude restriction must
be respected.
Moreover, dispatching the airplane with one of the following items of
the air conditioning and bleed system inoperative will also restrict flight
level to 31000 ft:
• Air Management System (AMS) Channel;
• Pack Flow Control Valve;
• High Stage Bleed Valve;
• Engine Bleed Valve;
GP-1999
GP
Page 66 REVISION 2
PUBLICATION
• Emergency Ram Air Valve;

• Emergency Ram Air Check Valve;
• Low Pressure Ground Connection Check Valves;
• High Pressure Ground Connection Check Valve;
• Flow Sensing Venturi.
Considering the Typical Operation Profile defined in Operations
Section, the following chart shows the trip fuel increase of dispatching
at FL 310 considering the optimum flight level:
EXPECTED FUEL BURN INCREASE OF DISPATCH ON

FL310 INSTEAD OF FL350
9.0%
8.5%
(%)
INCREASE (%)
FUEL INCREASE
8.0% E170
E175
7.5% E190
E195
TRIP FUEL
7.0%
TRIP
6.5%
6.0%
500 600 700 800 900 1000
TRIP DISTANCE (NM)
Recirculation Fans
If the recirculation fans have failed or are turned off, the impact on fuel
flow is negligible. The thermal load on each pack will increase
approximately 25%, also increasing the thermodynamic load. The
major impact of an inoperative recirculation fan is the reduction of the
associated electrical load on 0.5 KVA. It represents an increase of less
than 1 kg/h on fuel flow.
GP-1999
GP
REVISION 2 Page 67
PUBLICATION
The total airflow entering the cockpit and the passenger cabin is made
up of approximately 52% of fresh air and 48% recirculation air. It is
recommended the selection of automatic mode for recirculation fans in
all flights phases in order to relieve the thermodynamic load on PACKs
and increase its component’s lifespan.
No MMEL performance restrictions are applied for recirculation FANS
inoperative.
Fan Air Inlet Door
According to MMEL, it is permitted to dispatch the airplane with the
Fan Air Inlet Door fully open for 10 consecutive days. It will increase
the TSFC by 0.5% to 0.6%, with an attending impact on trip fuel.
Considering the Typical Operation Profile the following chart shows
the trip fuel increase considering the optimum flight level:

FAN INLET DOOR FULL OPEN
0.69%
0.67%
(%)
INCREASE (%)
FUEL INCREASE
0.65% E170
E175
0.63% E190
E195
TRIP FUEL
0.61%
TRIP
0.59%
0.57%
500 600 700 800 900 1000
TRIP DISTANCE (NM)
GP-1999
GP
Page 68 REVISION 2
PUBLICATION
Unpressurized Flight
According to MMEL, the following inoperative items require the
airplane to be dispatched under unpressurized conditions, limiting
cruise altitude to 10000 ft:
• Low Pressure Ground Connection Check Valves;
• CPCS Controller Channels auto or manual modes;
• Outflow Valve;
• Positive Pressure Relief Valve;
• Negative Pressure Relief Valve;
• Air Conditioning Packs;
• Pack Flow Control Valves;
• Flow Sensing Venturis;
• Water Spray Nozzles;
• Engine Bleed Systems;
• High Stage Bleed Valves;
• Engine Bleed Valves;
GP-1999
GP
REVISION 2 Page 69
PUBLICATION
The impact on fuel consumption is very significant and should be

considered for flight planning purposes. The following chart shows the
trip fuel increase when flying at 10000 ft, cruising with 250 KIAS
against an optimum flight level cruising at M 0.78:
EXPECTED FUEL BURN INCREASE OF DISPATCH ON

FL100 INSTEAD OF FL350
53%
52%
51%
(%)
50%
INCREASE(%)
49%
FUELINCREASE
E170
48%
E175
47%
E190
46%
TRIPFUEL
E195
45%
TRIP
44%
43%
42%
41%
40%
500 600 700 800 900 1000
TRIP DISTANCE (NM)
ANTI-ICE OPERATIONS
Considering normal operations, if icing condition is detected, the AMS
controller will automatically turn on the wings and engines thermal
anti-ice system, increasing bleed air requirements from the engines
that also increase fuel flow. It will remain activated for five additional
minutes after ice is no longer detected.
Icing condition is normally encountered when visible moisture is
present in the air and TAT is below 10 °C. In this scenario, ice may be
frequently encountered below 25000 ft during climb and descent.
Considering fuel conservation aspects, it is recommended that icing
conditions be avoided whenever possible, as well as unnecessarily
activation of the anti ice system.
It is recommended that the anti-ice system be operated in automatic
configuration during all the flight phases.
GP-1999
GP
Page 70 REVISION 2
PUBLICATION
Engine Thermal Anti-Ice

Bleed air for the engine anti-ice system is provided from the high-
pressure stage of the engines bleeds. When activated it will incur a
20 kg/h fuel flow increase.
Wings Thermal Anti Ice

The wing anti-ice system is also supplied by the high pressure stage
of the engine bleeds. The bleed energy for wing anti-ice system
requires much more air when compared with the engines’ anti-ice
system and significantly increases fuel flow.
When activated it will incur a 110 kg/h fuel flow increase.
SUMMARY
The accomplishment of the proper maintenance tasks and operational
procedures related to the Environmental and Pneumatic systems, as
presented in this chapter, will certainly lead to a more efficient airplane
operation and consequently optimizing fuel consumption.
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM
Operation of the EMBRAER 170/190 Family electrical system and its
maintenance also has also an impact on fuel consumption.
During a flight, considering normal operations, thermal energy from
fuel is converted into electrical energy through the IDGs (Integrated
Drive Generators) powered by the engines accessory gearbox.
The higher the electrical loads required for the airplane during a flight,
the more energy it will tap in the form of fuel. More fuel is then
necessary in order to supply the increased electrical demand.
On-ground, electrical energy can be provided from either APU
generator, external AC power source (GPU) powered by a
diesel/gasoline engine or even by electrical receptacles provided by
the airport. Some operators choose to continuously run the APU while
on the ground in order to supply the electrical system during a short
turn around time or while performing maintenance. In the same
manner, electrical loads should be reduced in order to attain lower fuel
consumption from the APU.
GP-1999
GP
REVISION 2 Page 71
PUBLICATION
How much fuel do the IDGs require to deliver 1 kWh to the electrical
system?
It is noteworthy that the IDGs generator’s efficiency depends on the
required electrical load. The higher the IDGs input load, the greater its
efficiency according to the table below.
IDG Input Load (kW) IDG Efficiency (%)
10 50
20 65
30 73
40 75
Under normal operating conditions, the IDGs supply between 15 kW to

25 kW and for this range, average IDG efficiency is 64%. Thus, the
fuel savings potential is considerable.
Also consider:
• Each 1 kg of JET A1 fuel potentially has 6587 kJ of energy
that is equivalent to 1.8291 kWh;
• The IDGs average efficiency is 64%;
• Other losses along the distribution system (such as heat,
radiation, inductance, etc…) are evaluated by 50%.
Consequently, 0.5855 kWh is effectively delivered to the electrical
system by burning 1 kg of fuel, when using IDGs.
Considering the average fuel price of US$ 1.70/Gal (or US$ 0.56/kg,
fuel density @ 0.803 kg/l), we can conclude that:
One Hour of IDGs generator connected to the electrical system means:

1.71 kg of fuel or US$ 0.96 per each 1 kW required by the electrical
loads.
IN-FLIGHT OPERATIONS
In-flight electrical loads are function of:
• Flight Profile;
• Operational practices and airline policy.
GP-1999
GP
Page 72 REVISION 2
PUBLICATION
Flight profile loads are the ones necessary to accomplish normal or

abnormal operations for each flight phase. They are necessary and
shall not be reduced unless required by operational procedures in the
AOM or QRH.
Operational practices are performed by crews in order to reduce some
specific loads that are not so necessary and shall be turned off
whenever possible. They usually are defined by airline’s policy and
training. Some examples are:
• Galley area loads: coffee makers, ovens and lighting.
• Passenger cabin lighting during night flights.
• Instrument lighting in daylight operation.
• Unnecessary use of radar.
Each operator shall evaluate which are the “unnecessary loads” that
may be turned off during a flight according to their operational profile.
The reduction of 10 kVA on electrical loads will represent an economy
of approximately 17.1 kg fuel or US$ 10.00 per hour of use, when
using IDGs power.
If Considering the Typical Operational Profile:
10 kVA REDUCTION ON IN-FLIGHT ELECTRICAL LOADS MEANS:

639440 kg of Fuel ~ US$ 358,000.00
GROUND OPERATIONS
Considering an average aviation fuel price of US$ 1.70/Gal, the cost of
APU energy is generally higher than the cost of GPU energy on the
ground. Considering fuel conservation aspects, it is far more beneficial
to use a GPU as an electrical power source when the airplane is
parked.
GP-1999
GP
REVISION 2 Page 73
PUBLICATION
However, operators should evaluate if its continuous use at the gate

is advisable instead of a GPU, considering:
• APU main components fail by cycle;
• GPU power is sometimes leased from handling companies
and may be charged by hour of use. Large variations of hourly
prices may be presented when considering leased GPUs from
handling companies;
• APU may provide pneumatic pressure to the packs on ground
when no other sources are available (such as external air
carts). Passenger’s thermal comfort may also be important for
airlines.
When continuous ground use is a choice it is recommended that,
whenever possible, a GPU be employed to minimize APU use time.
Considering an APU operating on the ground, at sea level,
temperature ISA and bleed air open, the electrical load is
approximately 25 kVA using normal ground loads. The fuel
consumption in this case is 143 kg/h.
If the load is reduced to 15 kVA, the fuel consumption is approximately
139 kg/h. Thus, for every 1 kVA electrical load reduction represents an
economy of approximately 0.37 kg/h of fuel or US$ 0.22 per hour. GP-1999
GP
Page 74 REVISION 2
PUBLICATION
If the Typical Operational Profile is considered and 30 min ground time

using APU as electrical source:
10 kVA ON GROUND REDUCTION OF ELECTRICAL LOADS MEANS:

69260 kg of Fuel ~ US$ 39,000.00
Operational and maintenance practices shall be used in order to

reduce electrical loads on the ground:
• Avoid unnecessary use of electrical motors and pumps on the
ground.
• Turn off unnecessary avionics instruments. Remember that
some equipment, like EFIS, require continuous heat removal
through the equipment cooling fans. They also require a
significant electrical load. This practice will also contribute to
reduce the electronic components fail rate.
• Reduce the brightness of the DUs whenever possible.
• Turnoff instrument and cockpit lights under daylight
conditions.
• Avoid maximum brightness of instrument and cockpit lights at
night. Use the setting necessary for comfort.
It is recommended the use of external power (GPU) on the ground
when maintenance is required.
It is also recommended that a GPU be employed when longer stops
on ground are performed without passengers. In this case, the GPU
should energize the ground service bus only in order to remove power
from avionics and non-essential loads, without removing power
required for ground servicing.
SUMMARY
Among other methods, optimization of electrical power usage is an
efficient mean of saving fuel. Airlines should adapt their policies and
practices to reduce or eliminate superfluous loads.
While on the ground, alternative means of generating electricity for the
airplane, such as GPU, should be preferred, in view of its lower costs
when compared to APU use.
GP-1999
GP
REVISION 2 Page 75
PUBLICATION
SECTION IV − CONCLUSIONS
Worldwide, profit margins have been reduced over the last years due
to intense competition among airline companies. Careless operation
without the proper attention to factors affecting the operating costs can
quickly reduce the profit margin.
“Long term” is the key factor to success. When a new type of airplane
joins the fleet, a new, long-term relationship with the manufacturer is
born, a new class of Pilots, Cabin Attendants and Technicians is
created, and a new type of business is launched. Through this
process, the investment on the fleet must pay off over a certain period.
Any difference in operating costs becomes a huge number over “a
number of years”.
The numbers shown in this publication are surprising. We believe that
they will impress any manager interested in making his airline
company profitable. They show how important attention to detail can
be when it brings huge costs in the long term.
Fuel saving is the sum of small contributions that seem to be
insignificant when isolated considered, but are expressive when
integrated over the years.
A successful Fuel Conservation Program established by an airline is
only effective when all related areas (Maintenance, Flight Crews and
Flight Operations Engineering) work together and are fully aware that
even small tasks and actions might have a significant impact on fuel
savings.
GP-1999
GP
Page 76 REVISION 2

GP-1999 ERJ Fuel Conservation Philosophy

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

GP-1999 ERJ Fuel Conservation Philosophy

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

EMBRAER 170/175/190/195

THIS DOCUMENT INCLUDES INFORMATION TO CLARIFY

LIST OF EFFECTIVE PAGES

ORIGINAL ........... 0........... NOV 30, 2004

* Title ................ REVISION 2 * 21................... REVISION 2

* Asterisk indicates pages revised, added or deleted by the current revision.

* Asterisk indicates pages revised, added or deleted by the current revision.

SECTION I – GENERAL ..................................................................... 1

FUEL BURN CONTRIBUTION TO OPERATING COSTS

TYPICAL OPERATIONAL PROFILE:

REDUCTION OF FUEL COSTS

Consider the following scenarios for the EMBRAER 170/190 Family.

TRIP TIME 92 min 91 min

EMBRAER 190 EMBRAER 195

TRIP TIME 90 min 90 min

Consider an airline using the EMBRAER 170/190 Family under those

600 NM TRIP EMBRAER 190 EMBRAER 195

ANNUAL SAVINGS kg 1180000 1220000

Note that apparently small amounts of fuel burn reduction lead to

Depending on airplane model

FUEL CONSERVATION PHILOSOPHY

This publication is directed to all those that are or can be engaged in a

SECTION II − FLIGHT OPERATIONS AND

Correct airplane operation is a key factor to maximize fuel savings.

The main factors that may determine such deviations are:

OEW INCREASE AND CONTROL

A small increase of an airplane’s weight may lead to significant

REGULATORY RESERVES AND DISPATCH POLICY

EXPECTED FUEL BURN INCREASE COMPARING WITH

Considering the Typical Operational Profile:

EVERY 100 NM INCREASE IN ALTERNATE AIRPORT DISTANCE MEANS:

ANNUAL EXTRA FUEL BURN ANNUAL EXTRA COST

EMBRAER 175 670000 375,000.00

EMBRAER 190 686000 384,000.00

EMBRAER 195 863000 483,000.00

EXTRA FUEL CONSIDERATIONS

EXPECTED FUEL BURN INCREASE ADDING 200 kg OF EXTRA FUEL

Considering the Typical Operational Profile:

DEPENDING ON AIRPLANE MODEL, 200 kg INCREASE ON TAKEOFF FUEL

ANNUAL EXTRA FUEL BURN ANNUAL EXTRA COST

EMBRAER 175 355000 199,000.00

EMBRAER 190 300000 168,000.00

EMBRAER 195 340000 190,000.00

REDUCED LANDING WEIGHT

IMPACT OF 500 kg DIFFERENCE ON ZERO FUEL WEIGHT ON THE

Considering the Typical Operational Profile:

500 kg OF DIFFERENCE ON ZERO FUEL WEIGHT ON THE FLIGHT PLANNING

ANNUAL EXTRA FUEL BURN ANNUAL EXTRA COST

EMBRAER 175 74900 42,000.00

EMBRAER 190 37500 21,000.00

EMBRAER 195 56600 31,000.00

OPTIMUM CRUISE ALTITUDE

FUEL BURN INCREASE OF FLYING

Above/Below Trip Fuel Increase (%)

Considering the Typical Operational Profile:

ADDITIONAL FUEL BURN FLYING 2000 FT BELOW OPTIMUM ALTITUDE

ANNUAL EXTRA FUEL BURN ANNUAL EXTRA COST

The optimum altitude can be verified on AOM flight planning section,

(Air Traffic rules and restrictions)

For EMBRAER 170/190 Family:

The optimum altitude increases in a rate of 15 ft/min to 20 ft/min

It is advisable that, for every 100 min of cruise-leveled flight, 2000 ft

TAS (kt) 458 450

GROUND SPECIFIC RANGE (NM/kg) 0.2416 0.2360