Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Most Fuel Efficient Large Passenger Transport?  
User currently offlineAfricawings From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 112 posts, RR: 0
Posted (6 years 5 months 2 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 6493 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

With today's outrageous fuel prices, does anyone know which is the most fuel efficient commercial aircraft out there (over 150 passengers) in terms of flying costs per per seat mile?

15 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlinePlaneWasted From Sweden, joined Jan 2008, 538 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (6 years 5 months 2 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 6488 times:

A380 I think, if you don't care about cargo.

BUT the A380 is very expensive to buy, and if you include that in the calculations there's probably another answer.


User currently offlineCloudy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 6317 times:



Quoting PlaneWasted (Reply 1):
BUT the A380 is very expensive to buy

I wouldn't think it is expensive to buy on a per-seat basis, which is the relevant measure to
use in answering this question.

Not only is the 747-8 in the running if you include cargo, but the soon-to-be available A350 and the 787-9/10 would also be in the same ballpark. At least, that is what I gather from what is available on the web.

The 757-300 is very efficient if you don't consider cargo capacity, but certainly not as efficient as an A380 operating at its design range. But my guess is that for US Transcon range or shorter, it beats any widebody older than the 787-8.


User currently offline9VSIO From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2006, 725 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 5 days ago) and read 6222 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Does a converted C-5 count?


Me: (Lining up on final) I shall now select an aiming point. || Instructor: Well, I hope it's the runway...
User currently onlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 17111 posts, RR: 66
Reply 4, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 5 days ago) and read 6211 times:



Quoting 9VSIO (Reply 3):
Does a converted C-5 count?

Heh. Can it be pressurized?



"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlineTrijetsRMissed From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 2388 posts, RR: 7
Reply 5, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 6201 times:

What about the 77W, where does that stack up?


There's nothing quite like a trijet.
User currently offline474218 From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 6340 posts, RR: 9
Reply 6, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 6195 times:



Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 4):
Heh. Can it be pressurized?

The C-5 is pressurized?


User currently onlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 17111 posts, RR: 66
Reply 7, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 6180 times:



Quoting 474218 (Reply 6):

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 4):
Heh. Can it be pressurized?

The C-5 is pressurized?

I don't think so, which is why I stated my question.  Wink



"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlineFlyf15 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 6163 times:

http://theaviationspecialist.com/lh_fuel_burn_compare.jpg

This should answer most of your questions. It looks like until the introduction of the A380, the A330-300 was most efficient. The A380 barely edges out the A330-300, and the 787-8 when in commercial service, will barely edge out the A380.

[Edited 2008-06-17 21:18:56]

User currently offlineWingedMigrator From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 2243 posts, RR: 56
Reply 9, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 6153 times:

My meager contribution, from a model based on the Breguet range equation. Stage length is 6000 nm, and payload is 1 pax (95 kg) per square meter of cabin floor area. This chart was created before the 787 was delayed and got heavier.

Big version: Width: 889 Height: 630 File size: 98kb
The evolution of fuel burn, at 1 pax / m2, with more types added


The thread to go with it: http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/tech_ops/read.main/199839

A note in passing, the chart posted above by FlyF15 was created by WidebodyPhotog (to whom a lot of credit is due in the above cited thread)

In answer to the OP, the most fuel-efficient airliner flying today is the A380-800. The most fuel-efficient airliner likely to fly in the next 10 years is the A380-900, assuming it gets built.


User currently offlineWingedMigrator From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 2243 posts, RR: 56
Reply 10, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 6148 times:



Quoting Africawings (Thread starter):
Does a converted C-5 count?

A lot of people seem to have the mistaken impression that the C-5 is bigger than the A380.

 no 

Maybe this is because most people who have seen a C-5 up close have never seen an A380. The A380 is significantly bigger than the C-5 in almost every metric, whether by wing area, MTOW, empty weight, wing span, engine thrust, etc. The C-5 is a shade longer, but that's about it... for the time being  Smile

(granted, the C-5 has much cooler landing gear)


User currently onlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 17111 posts, RR: 66
Reply 11, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 6137 times:

Here is a well known comparison. Unfortunately sans C-5.




"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlineTdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 12, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 6127 times:



Quoting 474218 (Reply 6):
The C-5 is pressurized?

Apparently, yes:
http://www.theaviationzone.com/factsheets/c5.asp

That makes sense...it would be awfully hard to transport a cargo hold of troops if you had to have them on supplemental oxygen the whole way.

Tom.


User currently offlineWingedMigrator From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 2243 posts, RR: 56
Reply 13, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 6116 times:

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 11):
Here is a well known comparison.

Authored by yours truly 

(edit): here's a better SVG version from Wikipedia.

I was asked to add the C-5 but the graphic got too cluttered, and size-wise it isn't even in the top three!

Quoting Flyf15 (Reply 8):
It looks like until the introduction of the A380, the A330-300 was most efficient.

Just caught that... it isn't quite so. The charts are for 6000 nm stage lengths, which the A330-300 can't do at that payload. That's why the color code is different, shown for 5000 nm. Also, the crude leveling assumption of 1 pax/m2 does not generally hold true.

The 773ER is often (and correctly) spoken of as the most efficient long range airliner, bar only the A380. That's why I used it as a reference against which to compare everything else.

[Edited 2008-06-17 23:45:05]

User currently offlineTF39 From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 110 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 6113 times:



Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 7):
Quoting 474218 (Reply 6):

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 4):
Heh. Can it be pressurized?

The C-5 is pressurized?

I don't think so, which is why I stated my question.

LOL! Fond memories of blankets, plastic, and chains to seal up the leaks in flight.

For those who don't know, the C-5 commonly experienced pressurization leaks during flight given the massive amount of seals required for it's forward and aft cargo doors. Visor ramp leaks and rear door side leaks seemed to be the most common (IMO). The rear door had two side seals that never seemed to seat right, hence the use of the various materials listed above. But in my dated experience, we never had a case where the crew had to put on their O2 masks. I had one time though where we were limited in altitude because we couldn't fully pressurize.

And yes, the landing gear is pretty cool!


User currently onlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 17111 posts, RR: 66
Reply 15, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 6081 times:



Quoting WingedMigrator (Reply 13):
Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 11):
Here is a well known comparison.

Authored by yours truly

Kudos to you then! Very well done!



"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Most Fuel Efficient Large Passenger Transport?
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Tech/Ops related posts only!
  • Not Tech/Ops related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
What Route Requires The Most Fuel? posted Wed Mar 12 2008 14:04:29 by CoolGuy
A Large Turboprop Transport: Feasible? posted Wed Oct 10 2007 11:34:13 by KELPkid
More Prop Blades = A More Fuel Efficient Q400? posted Wed Jul 5 2006 14:29:34 by NWDC10
Most Suitable/efficient Low Fare Aircraft posted Mon Feb 6 2006 17:14:17 by Curious
Which Is More Fuel Efficient? posted Thu Sep 9 2004 05:11:58 by PacificWestern
"higly Fuel-efficient MD-80"- Served Its Role? posted Tue Apr 22 2003 05:12:41 by Mirrodie
Most Fuel Efficient Single-aisle Jetliner? posted Thu Aug 9 2001 23:50:14 by Delta777-XXX
Passenger Airplane Fuel Consumption posted Thu May 4 2006 04:42:38 by PropilotJW
Cost Of Fuel Per Passenger? posted Fri Apr 1 2005 16:37:35 by Goinv
Fuel Saving Ideas posted Mon Jun 9 2008 08:24:35 by Will

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format