Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Fuel Usage Of A B737 And A320  
User currently offlineOO-VEG From Netherlands, joined Oct 2000, 1125 posts, RR: 1
Posted (14 years 2 months 1 week 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 17244 times:

I am wondering how much fuel the B737 (lets say the B737-700) and A320 use for each kilometer they are in a normal flight full loaded and also the fuel usage when the aircrafts are half loaded.
Are the aircraft engines also getting more efficient (less fuel usage) over the years or does that not concern the engine makers anymore??

Thank you in advance for the answer

13 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineTarantine From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 210 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (14 years 2 months 1 week 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 17155 times:

I am sure that the A320 is better because it is an advanced aircraft with a wider cabin. But this will be disputed by others.

RT


User currently offlineKonaB777 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (14 years 2 months 1 week 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 17139 times:

I think if Boeing put more time into designing planes than taking over competitors, they could have designed a better plane.

The A320 is better in every way. Boeing is behind in technology. I mean, the Airbus's first FBW (A320) came out in the mid 80s, & Boeing's first (777) came out in the mid 90s. We're talking a ten year lag here.


User currently offlineCba From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 4531 posts, RR: 3
Reply 3, posted (14 years 2 months 1 week 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 17136 times:

I'm not sure which one is more effiecient. They're both probably about the same. Also, the 737NG's are slightly newer than the A320 family (excluding the 318). And last, the 737-700 should be compared to the A319, and the 738 to the A320.

User currently offlineIndianGuy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (14 years 2 months 1 week 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 17126 times:


This kind of post is the perfect recipe for starting one of those wars!

The A32X is more fuel efficient, but maintainance and lease costs are much more expensive.

Comparative Fuel Burn in Litres/Hour (I got this from sources in an Indian carrier):

Code Fuel Consumption(l/h)
A319-100 2500
A320-200 2700
A321-200 2900

B717-200 2300
B737-400 2900
B737-600 2700
B737-700 2770
B737-800 2950
B737-900 NA




User currently offlineFly-By-Pilot From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 209 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (14 years 2 months 1 week 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 17122 times:

The 737 is a much lighter plane then the A320. It also has smaller engines. Thus it has better fule burn. IndianDude I dont know where you got those numbers but they are pure BS. The A320 family did have beter range then the older 737 family but the 737NG does beat the A320 family in all performance aspects. Look it up for your selves. Dont say "well since it is wider it is no doubt a better plane" or "the A320 is better in every way". What is this nonsense??? The 737 has been arround for over 30 years and it is a design that works. I am sure Airbus will keep the A320fam for a long time. The 737NG has 1500 orders in just a fiew years of existance. How is Boeing behind in technology??? So what if they dont use Fly-By-Wire. Boeing planes still have sophisticated computers on board. How can a few lines of code make a plane more technologically advanced. I dont undereststand where you people get such bias.

User currently offlineTarantine From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 210 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (14 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 17110 times:

Lets make this an easy topic & end it. Most Boeing fans will support the 737 & airbus fans will support the A320. I remarked earlier about a "wider cabin", I know that does not make an airliner more efficent, I guess that it was sarcasim, because I sway towards Boeing products. I would assume that the 737's being they have a very similar CFM engine & roughly equal weights (A320 vs 737-800) should be very similar in efficency. They are both fantasic airliners though.

RT


User currently offlinePrebennorholm From Denmark, joined Mar 2000, 6544 posts, RR: 54
Reply 7, posted (14 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 17113 times:

I'm not commenting on the A/B war, and not even trying to give an answer to the question. But I will just try to explain how difficult it is to answer such questions.
1. The 320 comes with four different MTOWs and three different engine subtypes. the B737-800 is much the same. All combinations have advantages and disadvantages.
2. Talking about the 320/737 families, then there are well over a dozen MTOWs and a few additional engine subtypes to choose from, cluttering the picture even more.
3. The 320 is slightly faster which has to be taken into account when comparing fuel burn per hour. Fuel burn per seat/mile is a better way to compare.
4. the 737-800 comes with or without winglets. If fitted, then they are an advantage, but only at certain speed/altitude/load combinations.
5. The 737 has a lighter airframe structure, making the fuel demanding climb - everything else equal - faster.
6. The 737 has a small drag disadvantage from the "missing" landing gear doors (but that gives a maintenance advantage).
7. The 320 has a small drag disadvantage from the 7" wider fuselage (but that gives a pax comfort advantage).
Etc. etc.
Both planes have the very newest wing design, and the same engines. The fuel burn differences are very small, and any one of them may come out on first place depending on subtype, engine subtype and other options chosen by the customer.

Someone wrote that one plane is much more expensive to lease. I doubt that. But well, there are just as many lease prices as there are different products multiplied by the number of leasing companies. All leasing companies take as high prices as the market is willing to pay. No airline company is stupid enough to pay a high leasing price, if they can get an equal quality product elsewhere at a lower price. If one of them gave less value for money, then you would find that product only parked in the deserts with white tails.

I write this mostly to make it obvious how silly it looks for those of us, who have read a book or two about it or studies a few reliable web sites, when we start an A vs. B "war of words" based on so simple, inaccurate and incomplete figures as mentions earlier on this thread. And then I don't even dare to think what the professionals may think when they see such things. Hopefully they can filter it out - that's also what I try to do.

Best regards, Preben Norholm



Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs, Preben Norholm
User currently offlinePacific From Hong Kong, joined Mar 2000, 1076 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (14 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 17085 times:

I think that a 738 is a better comparison to the A320 rather than the 737-700.
For the caclulation, I'll assume a 2-class layout.
A320 150 pax
B738 162 pax

My method is to divide the fuel capacity by range and then further divide that by the pax capacity. Fuel capacity, range and pax capacity data are from the companies' homepages.

A320 0.031813333
B738 0.029493462

This shows that a 738 is more efficient than an A320.
I'll also calculate figures for A319 and B737-700. To match the 737, range, I'll use the optional range of 6500kms for the 319.

A319 124 Pax 0.036799007
B737-700 126 Pax 0.034221097

Again, Boeing seems to have the edge in fuel efficiency.
I'm a fan of BOTH Boeing and Airbus.

IndianGuy: You can't just take the fuel consumption rates by itself as a comparison because the planes are of a different size. Bigger planes use up more fuel. The Boeing and Airbus planes are also of a slightly different size.

Pacific


User currently offlineIndianGuy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (14 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 17073 times:


Fly-By-Pilot:
It could only be You! I see u are a kiddo, so i'll let this pass.

the figures can be crosschecked from the web-sites of Boeing and Airbus. Then there is another site which lists the detailed performance figures of all the aircraft. U could check out that site. Search for the topic "Fuel Burn rate" and u'll find it.

One piece of advice: dont get into these fierce arguments, unless you are sure about what u r saying. You may feel passionately about a particular aircraft, but that doesnt make it a better aircraft.

Airline economics are based on a number of factors, and for some airlines the A32X family makes better sense and for others the 737NG family makes more sense. United goes for A32X's and WN goes for 737's why? Both airlines are making money, so obviosuly both the planes concrened are doing their job.

This question was regarding fuel-burn, and i think i answered that question without any bias whatsoever. All BS is in your mind.




User currently offlineFly-By-Pilot From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 209 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (14 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 17069 times:

I agree, they are both excelent products and there is now way anybody could say one is totaly better then the other.

IndianDude go to the site and post the exact link because I cant find it. When ever you post someting the whole post reeks of BS.


User currently offlineIndianGuy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (14 years 2 months 1 week 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 17061 times:

Prebennorholm:

Well, the standard A320 can actually carry 168 pax if configured in the same seat-pitch as the competing Boeing.

737-800 series aircraft are listed as 162 seaters with 36 inches in J-class, while the A320 is listed as a 150 seater with 38 inches in J-Class. There is a similar difference in Y-Class figures as well. Therefore when similarly configured, the A320 can actually carry more.

These figures are from the Boeing and Airbus sites respectively.

Fly-by-Pilot:GROW UP. read the whole post. Nobody is saying that Airbus is better than the Boeing narrowbodies in every respect. The question was about fuel burn, so it was answered.



User currently offlineGerardo From Spain, joined May 2000, 3481 posts, RR: 30
Reply 12, posted (14 years 2 months 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 17032 times:

IndianGuy, could you please post the link to the site you mentioned in this topic. It seems pretty interesting.

Regards
Gerardo



dominguez(dash)online(dot)ch ... Pushing the limits of my equipment
User currently offlineIndianGuy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (14 years 2 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 17025 times:

Yeah there is a decent site where you could get he info:
http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Lab/8803/orders00.htm
(
there is a 'Technical data' section where you may find data)

In addition write to Airbus and Boeing. They definitely write back. (it takes them a LOOONG time but its worth it.)

I will be putting up a website on Indian Aviation, and i have a entire Technical section where you could get info. on virtually ever commercial jetliner. It hsould be ready in another fortnights time.


Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Fuel Usage Of A B737 And A320
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...
Weight Of B737 Emergency Exit... posted Tue Sep 26 2006 01:33:44 by Kaddyuk
Fuel Efficiency Of In-flight Refuelling Pax A/c posted Thu Jul 6 2006 08:08:11 by Art
Random Alcohol Testing Of Pilots And Ground Staff posted Sat Jun 24 2006 01:48:58 by Julianuk
Of Airfoils, And Keeping The Centerline posted Mon Jun 19 2006 21:25:04 by IFACN
Heights Of Thunderstorms And Flying Over Them posted Sun Apr 30 2006 21:14:04 by JulianUK
Seats At Back Of 737 And Its Speed posted Thu Apr 27 2006 16:45:42 by DeltaDC9
Approach Speeds Of CRJs And ERJs – Please Help posted Thu Apr 6 2006 12:48:21 by AGANX
A380 Testing Schedule - List Of Flights And Tests? posted Sat Jan 28 2006 20:39:13 by Julesmusician
B762ER Fuel Usage? posted Wed Nov 23 2005 20:05:52 by Dogfighter2111
Fuel Flow Of Wide Bodies, Deep Analysis posted Fri Nov 4 2005 04:43:12 by Luis777
The End Of Tube-And-Wing Aerodynamics? posted Sun Dec 30 2007 02:10:24 by Faro
Cyclone In Bay Of Bengal And Overflying Aircraft? posted Thu Nov 15 2007 06:29:11 by BOACVC10
(Dis-) Advantages Of Canard And V-Tail Designs posted Fri Sep 21 2007 17:41:21 by Flexo
Flashing Red Light At Ends Of Cabin On A320 posted Fri Jun 29 2007 14:56:22 by HAWK21M
Weights Of Honda And/or Eclipse Jet Engine posted Tue Jan 30 2007 19:39:08 by Mlglaw
Boxes On A319 And A320 posted Mon Jan 29 2007 20:13:17 by Piedmont177
Usage Of USB Ports On A/C posted Thu Dec 28 2006 20:30:59 by Airbus3801
Weight Of B737 Emergency Exit... posted Tue Sep 26 2006 01:33:44 by Kaddyuk

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format