Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
What Is The Fuel Burn Rate Of B777-200LR/300ER  
User currently offlinephilippelouis1 From United States of America, joined Apr 2011, 2 posts, RR: 0
Posted (3 years 4 months 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 28229 times:

What is the fuel burn rate of B777-200LR/300ER

25 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinephilippelouis1 From United States of America, joined Apr 2011, 2 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (3 years 4 months 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 28232 times:

Can anyone provide me please information about the fuel burn rate of Boeing 777-200LR and 300ER,

I know that they vary under many circumstances and conditions. But what are the data under standard and normal conditions

I couldn't find them in the Boeing website.


User currently offlineintsim From United States of America, joined Nov 2010, 97 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (3 years 4 months 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 28168 times:

Hello,

You might try:

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/airports/acaps/777rsec3.pdf

Found in the Airplane Performance chart in Detailed Technical Characteristics of the 777 section.

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/airports/777.htm

You can make some general assumptions on fuel required for missions.

Jeff


User currently offlinetrex8 From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 4763 posts, RR: 14
Reply 3, posted (3 years 4 months 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 28155 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Per previous posting by Zeke these are the fuel burn rates used by CX pilots for calculations

772/A343 6900kg/hr
A333 6000kg/hr
A346 8900kg/hr
744 11100kg/hr
77W 8100kg/hr


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30906 posts, RR: 87
Reply 4, posted (3 years 4 months 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 28098 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Daniel Tsang at http://www.aspireaviation.com claimed that EK sees a fuel burn of 2.8L per 100km for both the 777-200LR and 777-300ER.

User currently offlinetrex8 From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 4763 posts, RR: 14
Reply 5, posted (3 years 4 months 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 27944 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Stitch (Reply 4):
Daniel Tsang at http://www.aspireaviation.com claimed that EK sees a fuel burn of 2.8L per 100km for both the 777-200LR and 777-300ER.

per pax, per kg????


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30906 posts, RR: 87
Reply 6, posted (3 years 4 months 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 27926 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting trex8 (Reply 5):
per pax, per kg????

I would imagine that is 2.8 liters per 100 passenger kilometers.


User currently offlinearniepie From Belgium, joined Aug 2005, 1265 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (3 years 4 months 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 27893 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 4):
Daniel Tsang at http://www.aspireaviation.com claimed that EK sees a fuel burn of 2.8L per 100km for both the 777-200LR and 777-300ER.

Maybe for their future high density 773ER at EK, with 442 seats that could be true, but saying that a 772LR which are all configured for 266 seats , is as fuel efficient as the high density 773ER seems to be illogical , to say the least.

Even among their large 773ER fleet there should be large differences knowing that they are going to have no less than 5 different setups ranging from 354 to, 358, 364 , 427 and 442 passengers.

[Edited 2011-04-27 03:44:17]


[edit post]
User currently offlinezeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 9029 posts, RR: 75
Reply 8, posted (3 years 4 months 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 27855 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 4):
Daniel Tsang at http://www.aspireaviation.com claimed that EK sees a fuel burn of 2.8L per 100km for both the 777-200LR and 777-300ER.

That number is rubbish unless the assumptions associated with them is also listed.

Let me reverse engineer that number to a fuel burn per hour.

Looking at their 2 class 77W, 42J/385Y = 427 pax.

Per 100 km, 427x 2.8 = 1195.6 kg/100 km
Per km = 1195.6/100 = 11.956 / km

So their 2 class 77W would have an average cruise speed of around 880 km/hr

Per hour = 10,521 kg/hr


Looking at their 3 class 77W, 12F/42J/304Y = 358 pax.

Per 100 km, 358x 2.8 = 1002.4 kg/100 km
Per km = 1002.4/100 = 10.024 / km

So their 3 class 77W would have an average cruise speed of around 880 km/hr

Per hour = 8,821 kg/hr

Both of these numbers are clearly wrong. My take on the numbers is that it assumes a certain load factor for the aircraft type, and was derived from RPK and ASK numbers, it does not indicate the fuel burn performance of the aircraft itself.



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently onlinesunrisevalley From Canada, joined Jul 2004, 4954 posts, RR: 5
Reply 9, posted (3 years 4 months 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 27726 times:

From a flight plan ORD-AKL for a 77L with a TOW of about 318t the fuel burn at cruise was 100.171t for 15-hours.

User currently offlineFerpe From France, joined Nov 2010, 2803 posts, RR: 59
Reply 10, posted (3 years 4 months 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 27703 times:

Quoting trex8 (Reply 3):
772/A343 6900kg/hr
A333 6000kg/hr
A346 8900kg/hr
744 11100kg/hr
77W 8100kg/hr

This is of course very usefull and practical information, where would the 787-8 fuel burn be? 5300kg/hr?



Non French in France
User currently offlineFerpe From France, joined Nov 2010, 2803 posts, RR: 59
Reply 11, posted (3 years 4 months 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 27696 times:

I checked what Piano-X would say, it says 5200kg/hr M0,85 cruise burn at FL390 for a 788 where I have adjusted for present weights and loaded to MZFW, should this be OK?

[Edited 2011-04-27 14:12:32]


Non French in France
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30906 posts, RR: 87
Reply 12, posted (3 years 4 months 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 27641 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting zeke (Reply 8):
That number is rubbish unless the assumptions associated with them is also listed.


Daniel strikes me as a rather pro-Boeing and anti-Airbus person, so I felt those numbers were suspect.


Quoting sunrisevalley (Reply 9):
From a flight plan ORD-AKL for a 77L with a TOW of about 318t the fuel burn at cruise was 100.171t for 15-hours.

Per a post on PPRune, for the 10 April 2009 GRU-DXB flight, an EK 777-200LR carried 102t of trip fuel (Flight Time: 13h45m).

Also from PPRune, Trip Fuel for an EK 777-200LR doing DXB-LAX would be around 121.5t with a ZFW of 209t and a TOW of 342t.

[Edited 2011-04-27 18:27:31]

User currently offlinecoopdogyo From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 189 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (3 years 4 months 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 27616 times:

According to a Boeing reference guide I have the 777-200LR burns 3.2 liters per 100 passenger km over and 6,000nm(11,110km) trip and the 777-300ER burns 2.9 liters per 100 passenger km over the same trip.

User currently offlinezeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 9029 posts, RR: 75
Reply 14, posted (3 years 4 months 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 27538 times:

Quoting coopdogyo (Reply 13):
According to a Boeing reference guide I have the 777-200LR burns 3.2 liters per 100 passenger km over and 6,000nm(11,110km) trip and the 777-300ER burns 2.9 liters per 100 passenger km over the same trip.

For the 77L that works out to be 8,476 kg/hr assuming bog standard Boeing 301 pax

For the 77W that works out to be 9,314 kg/hr assuming bog standard Boeing 365 pax



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently offlinearniepie From Belgium, joined Aug 2005, 1265 posts, RR: 1
Reply 15, posted (3 years 4 months 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 27520 times:

Quoting zeke (Reply 14):
Quoting coopdogyo (Reply 13):
According to a Boeing reference guide I have the 777-200LR burns 3.2 liters per 100 passenger km over and 6,000nm(11,110km) trip and the 777-300ER burns 2.9 liters per 100 passenger km over the same trip.

For the 77L that works out to be 8,476 kg/hr assuming bog standard Boeing 301 pax

For the 77W that works out to be 9,314 kg/hr assuming bog standard Boeing 365 pax

Zeke,

Far for me doubting your numbers but aren't you mixing up kilo's with liters?
eg, the 772LR

-11110 km @ 880 km/h => 12.625 hrs of flight
-3.2L per passenger per 100 km x 301 passengers = 963.2L / 100Km
-963.2 x 111.1 (100km segments) = 107011.52 LITERS of total use or 8,476 LITERS/ hour ,not kilos.(at 100% capacity)

BTW that seems rather optimistic on Boeing's side knowing that fuel is lighter than water at about 0.8KG/L (rough)

Which would translate to 6800kg/hr at full capacity in Boeing standard layout on a 880km/h 111110km 12.625 hr flight .
Sounds rather optimistic.

Now let's redo these numbers for the 266 seat EK 772LR, 11.7% less seats probably means at least 10% less fuel efficiency per passenger, no?



[edit post]
User currently offlinearniepie From Belgium, joined Aug 2005, 1265 posts, RR: 1
Reply 16, posted (3 years 4 months 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 27513 times:

I just did the 77W used by EK in its highest density config (427 pax)

8100kg per hour on a 11110km 12.625hr (880kmh) flight means 102262.5kg total use
102262.5kg @ 0.80kg/liter JETA (average specific fuel wheight) makes for 127828.1 Liters totally used.

127828.1Liters for 427 pax in 111.1 segments (100km) would mean 2.6945 Liters per 100km per passenger @ 100% LF.

rather impressive give or take a few percentages when we talk about average fuel consumption.

Offcourse this would not take into consideration that the flight , being so full for such a long distance, would be able to cruise high enough to get to these numbers so early in the flight.

So 2.8L per 100km for the highest density 77W seems feasable if most things work in its favor (TOW not too much cargo, wind direction and windspeed, low CI ,....) at 100% LF

the 772LR at 266pax has no chance of doing the same if my reasoning is anywhere near realistic.



[edit post]
User currently offlinearniepie From Belgium, joined Aug 2005, 1265 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (3 years 4 months 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 27508 times:

for the 77L the numbers go way up

at 100% LF , 266pax for EK

Lets take 7200kg / hour (very optimistic, I realize but lets assume low TOW, no cargo higher initial cruise altitude than on the 77W at low CI .

90900kg used on the 11110Km flight (880kmh) translating to about 113625Liters used.

113625Liters for 111.1 segments (100km) for 266 pax would mean 3.845Liters per 100km per passenger (remember this would be for a 100% LF), not anywhere near the 77W high density configuration.

conclusion for EK (all 100%LF) best possible fuel consumption per passenger per 100km.

772L- 266 seats - 3.845L/100km
77W- 360 seats - 3.196L/100km
77W- 427 seats - 2.695L/100km



[edit post]
User currently onlinesunrisevalley From Canada, joined Jul 2004, 4954 posts, RR: 5
Reply 18, posted (3 years 4 months 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 27363 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 12):
Also from PPRune, Trip Fuel for an EK 777-200LR doing DXB-LAX would be around 121.5t with a ZFW of 209t and a TOW of 342t.

I don't know how you can get a 77L up to a 209t ZFW unless the cargo is considerably above average belly cargo density.
At average density it is volume limited. By my figuring the best that can be achieved is about 42.7t.
Referring to reply 9, the fuel load to meet all diversion, holding requirements etc. for that day was 120t . The burn for the 15hr 55m sector would have been 110.593t. Of this cruise was 100.171t. This was a hypothetical plan and was based on a TOW of about 328t. Now this was a Jespersen plan and was based on a "generic" 77L. I would assume that EK have burn values for each frame so there will be variations.


User currently offlinejetlife2 From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 221 posts, RR: 25
Reply 19, posted (3 years 4 months 4 days ago) and read 27344 times:

I suggest you use this data

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/startup/pdf/777_perf.pdf

At the end you will find Boeing's stated fuel burn per seat for 3,000 and 6,000 mile missions.

Certainly this is subject to many caveats and conditions, but at least it is original source data for you that you do not have to reverse calculate.

I will look for some more public domain original info. that I can quote here.

Regards

Gareth


User currently offlinezeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 9029 posts, RR: 75
Reply 20, posted (3 years 4 months 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 27312 times:

Quoting arniepie (Reply 15):
Far for me doubting your numbers but aren't you mixing up kilo's with liters?

Yep I did, my bad, good catch.



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently offlineiwok From Sweden, joined Jan 2005, 1108 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 20071 times:

Quoting zeke (Reply 20):
Yep I did, my bad, good catch.

Zeke - Any idea how these values change during the flight. I.e. there is a certain fuel usage during, takeoff, clim, initial cruise and cruise just before defending to land. I have got to think that as fuel is consumed that fuel burn drops because gross weight is dropping.

Does that make sense??

Thanks in advance  

iwok


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30906 posts, RR: 87
Reply 22, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 20036 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting iwok (Reply 21):
Zeke - Any idea how these values change during the flight.

He noted that for a 777-300ER it varied from a low of 6,500kg per hour to a high of 10,500kg per hour across the flight. And for a 747-400, it varies from a low of 9,000kg to a high of 13,000kg per hour.


User currently offlineferpe From France, joined Nov 2010, 2803 posts, RR: 59
Reply 23, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 19844 times:

Quoting iwok (Reply 21):
Any idea how these values change during the flight. I.e. there is a certain fuel usage during, takeoff, clim, initial cruise and cruise just before defending to land. I have got to think that as fuel is consumed that fuel burn drops because gross weight is dropping.

What do you want to know and for what frame variants? As I have a cruise drag model which is not to far off I could check a couple of numbers for you but not all these types and the different flight modes.

Zeke can then complement that with real numbers (which normally contain a higher trip fuel contingency then 5% as it also take frame and engine deterioration into account). My model gives you the fuel burns with regulatory reserves, it is within some +-2-3% when I have done things right .



Non French in France
User currently offlineiwok From Sweden, joined Jan 2005, 1108 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 19775 times:

Quoting ferpe (Reply 23):
What do you want to know and for what frame variants? As I have a cruise drag model which is not to far off I could check a couple of numbers for you but not all these types and the different flight modes.


All thanks very much for your help!

Actually I have to say that I am seeking this info because I am writing proposal for a fuel cell UAV which must operate for a 16-hours mission. In order to estimate how much the power would drop over time I figured I'd use a rough approximation from the 777-LR which also has long mission duration.

That is a very interesting model. Is there anyway I could get a hold of this? I'm actually looking at a small UAV with a catapult launch, hybrid battery for surge, GTOW 30lb and ZFW of 23lb. Cruise is 55mph. That's all I can say about it.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 22):
He noted that for a 777-300ER it varied from a low of 6,500kg per hour to a high of 10,500kg per hour across the flight. And for a 747-400, it varies from a low of 9,000kg to a high of 13,000kg per hour.

Both of these give me enough to wave my hands and say as the flight progresses fuel burn drops by 30-40%, depending on a "range of configurations and parameters" and that we will review this in detail once the proposal is awarded    

cheers

iwok


User currently offlineFlighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 8491 posts, RR: 2
Reply 25, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 19770 times:

777-200ER typically does 2,300 gallons per hour; DC-10 was up near 3,000 gal per hour. 744, 3,600 gallons. On typical stage lengths. A330-300, about 1,900 gph.

So, I would expect 777-200LR to be around 2,200 gal per hour, and 77W up around 2,900, given the comparisons we know about.

Edit: Given the kg/hr listed above, my numbers may be a little high. They are from the US DOT, as reported by US airlines over many years.

[Edited 2013-01-11 10:58:17]

Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic What Is The Fuel Burn Rate Of B777-200LR/300ER
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 Is The Whell Rim Size Of Most Widebodie? posted Tue Nov 18 2008 19:13:46 by 747400sp
What Is The RB211-535E4B Capable Of? posted Wed Aug 22 2007 21:32:02 by EA772LR
What Is The Actual New Range Of 772LR? posted Sun Apr 8 2007 18:44:51 by Ferdinando
What Is The Floor Made Out Of? posted Fri Feb 28 2003 07:47:35 by Jcs17
What Is The Thickness Of An Asphalt Runway? posted Tue Nov 16 2010 04:20:34 by mehairy7
What Is The Vent On The Side Of This DC-10? posted Tue Jun 1 2010 19:18:58 by Gulfstream650
What Is The Cone On The Back Of A Jet Engine? posted Sun May 9 2010 08:55:23 by c5load
787: What Is The Benefit Of So Much Wing Flex? posted Tue Dec 22 2009 03:06:46 by Faro
What Is The Cost Of Turbofans? posted Sun Feb 8 2009 08:14:55 by Nitepilot79
What Is The Angle Of This Plane @ Takeoff posted Thu Dec 13 2007 17:18:27 by SuseJ772
What Is The Cost (flight-hour) Of A Dash-Q400? posted Thu Feb 19 2009 22:49:40 by Beaucaire
What Is The Whell Rim Size Of Most Widebodie? posted Tue Nov 18 2008 19:13:46 by 747400sp
What Is The RB211-535E4B Capable Of? posted Wed Aug 22 2007 21:32:02 by EA772LR
What Is The Actual New Range Of 772LR? posted Sun Apr 8 2007 18:44:51 by Ferdinando
What Is The Floor Made Out Of? posted Fri Feb 28 2003 07:47:35 by Jcs17
What Is The "bump" On The Nose Of The BD-700 posted Wed Feb 1 2012 19:13:07 by csturdiv
What Is The Cabin Width Of An ERJ? posted Tue Jan 10 2012 17:39:04 by 747400sp
What Is The Purpose Of The Solid Red Window... posted Mon May 16 2011 13:55:20 by timmydasquirrel
What Is The Thickness Of An Asphalt Runway? posted Tue Nov 16 2010 04:20:34 by mehairy7
What Is The Vent On The Side Of This DC-10? posted Tue Jun 1 2010 19:18:58 by Gulfstream650

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format