Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
747-8 Fuel Burn  
User currently offlinecosmofly From United States of America, joined May 2009, 649 posts, RR: 0
Posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 5365 times:

First flight pilots said the take off weight is 630,000lb of which 130,000lb is fuel. Test flight is almost 4hr and pilots said they can fly another 8hr before landing. Granted that it was only flying at 200 knots, is there enough info to project the actual fuel burn of the 748?

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/gener...el=comm&id=news/Land020810.xml

13 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently onlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31062 posts, RR: 87
Reply 1, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 5364 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

LH's latest projections show 3.5 liters per 100km, .1 liters more than the projections for their A380-800s and .7 liters better than their 747-400s.

User currently offlineweb500sjc From United States of America, joined Sep 2009, 744 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 5307 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Why do they load up that much fuel, and what is the Maximum landing whieght of that bird! or did they just dump the rest
of the fuel before landing



Boiler Up!
User currently offlineOldAeroGuy From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 3527 posts, RR: 67
Reply 3, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 5277 times:

Quoting cosmofly (Thread starter):
First flight pilots said the take off weight is 630,000lb of which 130,000lb is fuel.
Quoting web500sjc (Reply 2):
Why do they load up that much fuel, and what is the Maximum landing whieght of that bird!

The Max Landing Weight of the 747-8F is 757,000 lb.

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/airports/acaps/7478sec2.pdf

The airplane was below MLW at takeoff. No fuel was dumped prior to landing.



Airplane design is easy, the difficulty is getting them to fly - Barnes Wallis
User currently offlineOldAeroGuy From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 3527 posts, RR: 67
Reply 4, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 5275 times:

Quoting cosmofly (Thread starter):
Granted that it was only flying at 200 knots, is there enough info to project the actual fuel burn of the 748?

No, cruise fuel mileage will not be tested until basic airworthiness has been established.



Airplane design is easy, the difficulty is getting them to fly - Barnes Wallis
User currently offline747classic From Netherlands, joined Aug 2009, 2161 posts, RR: 14
Reply 5, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 5211 times:

Quoting OldAeroGuy (Reply 4):
No, cruise fuel mileage will not be tested until basic airworthiness has been established.

Correct, the exact fuel mileage will be verified on N5017Q (RC521), the second 747-8F test aircraft.

"The second 747-8F (RC521) will join the flight test program as soon as RC501's work confirms the high- and low-speed configuration around mid-March. Painted identically to the first aircraft for the test program, RC521's principal task will be proving the General Electric GEnx-2B67 engines and fuel efficiency of the model measured during NAMS (nautical air miles) tests."

For further detailed 747-8F certification schedule :
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/gener...=comm&id=news/Flight020410.xml



Operating a twin over the ocean, you're always one engine failure from a total emergency.
User currently offlineFabo From Slovakia, joined Aug 2005, 1219 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 4 days ago) and read 5125 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 1):
LH's latest projections show 3.5 liters per 100km, .1 liters more than the projections for their A380-800s and .7 liters better than their 747-400s.

What configurations do they compare with 744 and 748?



The light at the end of tunnel turn out to be a lighted sing saying NO EXIT
User currently offlinealwaysontherun From Netherlands Antilles, joined Jan 2010, 464 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 5069 times:

Quoting web500sjc (Reply 2):
or did they just dump the rest
of the fuel before landing

I am no expert, but I do not think you can "plan" to dump fuel before take off, as part of your operation.
Environmental organizations and local government may have something to say about that!
That is pretty much an emergency procedure, not something you do just for the sake of it.

What I would like to know, how do they test the fuel dumping facility on a new aircraft?
On the apron?

### "I am always on the Run"###



"Failure is not an option, it comes standard in any Windows product" - an anonymous MAC owner.
User currently onlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31062 posts, RR: 87
Reply 8, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 5022 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Fabo (Reply 6):
What configurations do they compare with 744 and 748?

526 for the A388, 420 for the 748 and 330 for the 744.


User currently offlinetdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 9, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 4867 times:

Quoting web500sjc (Reply 2):
Why do they load up that much fuel

You want early flights to be mid-CG and mid-weight...you want to be right in the heart of the flight envelope since at the edges there be dragons. The easiest way to move CG and weight around is fuel load.

Quoting alwaysontherun (Reply 7):
I am no expert, but I do not think you can "plan" to dump fuel before take off, as part of your operation.

You can. Its done routinely on test flights.

Quoting alwaysontherun (Reply 7):
What I would like to know, how do they test the fuel dumping facility on a new aircraft?

Takeoff, get some altitude, turn on fuel jettison system.

Quoting alwaysontherun (Reply 7):
On the apron?

Now *that* would annoy the airport. This type of testing can be done in a fuel dock if you've got hoses to catch everything coming out of the jettison pipes, but that's a pain. It's a lot easier to just fly it.

Tom.


User currently offlineKELPkid From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 6398 posts, RR: 3
Reply 10, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 4836 times:

Quoting alwaysontherun (Reply 7):
Environmental organizations and local government may have something to say about that!
That is pretty much an emergency procedure, not something you do just for the sake of it.

If it's done at altitude, the fuel atomizes and evaporates before it hits the ground...okay, it might cause a localized area of smog on a sunny day  

Wasteful? Yes. But it's gotta be tested before someone has to do it in reality...and when it's needed in real life, it might save a life or even an airframe (a poorly-executed overweight landing could be the end of an airframe).



Celebrating the birth of KELPkidJR on August 5, 2009 :-)
User currently offlinealwaysontherun From Netherlands Antilles, joined Jan 2010, 464 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 4778 times:

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 9):
You can. Its done routinely on test flights.

Without any permission from local authorities or anything like that?
Now that really surprises me!
I work in an industry where every drop counts, literally!
You drop as much as 1 liter of hydrocarbon in the water and you may end up in court, depending on circumstances obviously!

That is interesting. I thought they would test that on the ground.

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 9):
This type of testing can be done in a fuel dock if you've got hoses to catch everything coming out of the jettison pipes

Something like that is what I had in mind.

Just to confirm this point: a test pilot can open up "the valves" anywhere, as long as it is at sufficient altitude.

Quoting KELPkid (Reply 10):
okay, it might cause a localized area of smog on a sunny day

Is that all?

That is the good thing about this site, so much to learn!

### "I am always on the Run"###



"Failure is not an option, it comes standard in any Windows product" - an anonymous MAC owner.
User currently offlinetdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 12, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 4638 times:

Quoting alwaysontherun (Reply 11):
Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 9):
You can. Its done routinely on test flights.

Without any permission from local authorities or anything like that?
Now that really surprises me!

As far as I know, yes. It's possible that the companies that do it have discharge permits to specifically cover this, but I've never heard of that before. Keep in mind that you're not dumping liquid hydrocarbons on the ground or water...it all evaporates before it gets to the ground. All jets dump some hydrocarbon vapour due to incomplete combustion, so it's just a matter of degrees.

Quoting alwaysontherun (Reply 11):
Just to confirm this point: a test pilot can open up "the valves" anywhere, as long as it is at sufficient altitude.

Yes but, as mentioned above, there may be some kind of blanket preauthorization paperwork that I don't know about. I do know that you can do this on tests without getting specific permission for each individual test.

Tom.


User currently offlinealwaysontherun From Netherlands Antilles, joined Jan 2010, 464 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 4426 times:

Thanks Thomas,

you are a good man.

### "I am always on the Run"###



"Failure is not an option, it comes standard in any Windows product" - an anonymous MAC owner.
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic 747-8 Fuel Burn
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...
Fuel Burn Difference Between The A346 And 742/3/4? posted Wed Dec 30 2009 08:27:16 by EA772LR
Interesting Fuel Burn Numbers From LH posted Wed Nov 25 2009 15:32:59 by Stitch
Aircraft Fuel Burn Specs posted Fri Jun 12 2009 08:05:17 by Cba
RR Recovers Trent Fuel Burn Margin For 787 posted Sun Apr 5 2009 06:16:37 by Rheinbote
CRJ200 Fuel Burn posted Mon Oct 27 2008 10:42:50 by TechSpec
Source For Fuel Burn Information posted Mon Oct 20 2008 11:33:33 by ACdreamliner
Fuel Burn Statistics: B77W, A380, B787, B744, A350 posted Tue Jun 3 2008 04:02:33 by SInGAPORE_AIR
Aircraft Fuel Burn Rate? posted Fri Apr 4 2008 08:47:16 by Ronerone
Fuel Burn & Cargo Capacity posted Mon Jan 28 2008 21:05:58 by Timebandit
Fuel Burn (gal/hr) posted Tue Oct 9 2007 08:28:19 by Lrgt

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format