Do aircraft use less fuel using a longer runway?

many of answers partially or correct, if want split hairs, far no answers take account physics related efficiency of given thrust force in accelerating object (the aircraft) rest takeoff speed. example, applying full engine power @ beginning of runway aircraft @ standstill *quickest* way reach takeoff speed, not efficient. similarly, de-rated takeoff power longer runway (which involves longer takeoff roll reach takeoff speed) may more efficient full power, still is not *most* efficient use of power possible. efficient use of engine power gradually increase power @ specified rate acceleration of aircraft evolves. rate of power increase unique aircraft type, takeoff weight, , atmospheric , runway conditions.

think of way: on bicycle shiftable gears, more efficient use of energy pedal standstill top speed beginning in low gear , gradually shifting higher gears accelerate. not efficient start in highest (hardest) gear. more efficient smoothly modulate acceleration. effect of gradual, modulated acceleration applies jet, rocket, or propeller propultion in fashion similar (albeit distantly so) of bicycle.

so, if want split hairs, efficient gradually modulate power increase engines demand longer runway otherwise. but... , here's part matters... increase in efficiency doing way compared way done in practice negligable enough wouldn't make additional complications in takeoff procedures flight crew , aircraft systems modulated acceleration create; savings in efficiency tiny in grand scheme of things, cumulative effect of thousands of takeoffs on long term.

short answer is, de-rated aircraft takeoff procedures used *good enough* efficiency, , full-power takeoffs unaviodable larger aircraft in cramped airport environments.

do aircraft use less fuel if use longer runway take off from.??

Cars & Transportation Aircraft Next