atmx2000
Posts: 4301
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 4:24 pm

RE: 773ER - Improved Overall Fuel Efficiency

Sat Aug 04, 2007 11:54 am

If the range is standard miles, and not nautical miles, then the range is 7900 nm, which is what we know the 773ER to be capable of and is not new. The range boost is over the predicted range which was substantially less than the A346.
ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
 
pygmalion
Posts: 836
Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2006 12:47 am

RE: 773ER - Improved Overall Fuel Efficiency

Sat Aug 04, 2007 12:13 pm

Quote:
said the 777-300ER consumes about 20 percent less fuel per seat than its closest competitor, Airbus SAS' A340-600.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 14626
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: 773ER - Improved Overall Fuel Efficiency

Sat Aug 04, 2007 12:41 pm

BoeingBus/Pygmalion

The article says both those little gems come from the "Chicago-based Boeing", not Air New Zealand....

Would you expect the "Chicago-based Boeing, which assembles its commercial jets in the Seattle area" to say anything different ?

Slow news day from Boeing media....
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
pygmalion
Posts: 836
Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2006 12:47 am

RE: 773ER - Improved Overall Fuel Efficiency

Sat Aug 04, 2007 12:55 pm

Quoting Zeke (Reply 3):
Slow news day from Boeing media....

They announced an order for 4 777-3ER for Air New Zealand + 3 options.

They should not announce orders?

Did they say something inaccurate?

Was there a bigger story about A3510 orders that I missed that should have overshadowed it?

Slow news day for Airbus Media???
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 14626
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: 773ER - Improved Overall Fuel Efficiency

Sat Aug 04, 2007 1:13 pm

Quoting Pygmalion (Reply 4):
They should not announce orders?

Not at all, they should, just the article does not reflect the Boeing press release very well, epically the two quotes yourself and BoeingBus thought were key.

Quoting Pygmalion (Reply 4):
Did they say something inaccurate?

We will never know, maybe yes, maybe no, the Boeing press release is in km and nm, and does not mention the 346 or Airbus.

The 777 is not the most fuel efficient aircraft, as stated by the Air New Zealand CEO Rob Fyfe.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
EA772LR
Posts: 1285
Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2007 2:18 am

RE: 773ER - Improved Overall Fuel Efficiency

Sat Aug 04, 2007 1:54 pm

Quoting Zeke (Reply 5):
The 777 is not the most fuel efficient aircraft, as stated by the Air New Zealand CEO Rob Fyfe.

Well what is more fuel efficient that is currently in service?? I'm not starting anything Zeke, just wondering.
We often judge others by their actions, but ourselves by our intentions.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 14626
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: 773ER - Improved Overall Fuel Efficiency

Sat Aug 04, 2007 2:05 pm

Quoting EA772LR (Reply 6):
Well what is more fuel efficient that is currently in service?? I'm not starting anything Zeke, just wondering.

A 737 would burn at least 5t a hour less than a 777, little piston aircraft burn something like 25kg an hour, with is over 8000 kg less an hour than a 777....miles/gallon, 777 is not the most fuel efficient, fuel burn per hour, the 777 is not the most efficient...

The most fuel efficient aircraft in service would have to be a glider, no fuel at all.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 9285
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: 773ER - Improved Overall Fuel Efficiency

Sat Aug 04, 2007 2:55 pm

Sleeping on the couch tonight Zeke?  Yeah sure

How many 737 seat up to 500 passengers? How many Cessna 152s boast trans-Pacific range? And which airlines have gliders in commercial service exactly? The 777-300/ER is by far the most fuel efficient aircraft in its category, and its size makes it per/seat one of the most fuel efficient airplanes ever flown period. What then, is in-service, and offers a per-passenger advantage over the -300ER?
I have a three post per topic limit. You're welcome to have the last word.
 
eatmybologna
Posts: 375
Joined: Sat Apr 30, 2005 3:21 am

RE: 773ER - Improved Overall Fuel Efficiency

Sat Aug 04, 2007 3:11 pm

Quoting Zeke (Reply 7):
Quoting EA772LR (Reply 6):
Well what is more fuel efficient that is currently in service?? I'm not starting anything Zeke, just wondering.

A 737 would burn at least 5t a hour less than a 777, little piston aircraft burn something like 25kg an hour, with is over 8000 kg less an hour than a 777....miles/gallon, 777 is not the most fuel efficient, fuel burn per hour, the 777 is not the most efficient...

The most fuel efficient aircraft in service would have to be a glider, no fuel at all.

Efficiency is a relative term and in this case Rob Fyfe was obviously referring to CASM (Cost per Available Seat Mile).

But you knew that  mischievous   old 
Isn't knowledge more than just the acquisition of information? Shouldn't the acquired information be correct?
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 14626
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: 773ER - Improved Overall Fuel Efficiency

Sat Aug 04, 2007 3:27 pm

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 8):
What then, is in-service, and offers a per-passenger advantage over the -300ER?

The quote was "Tourists come to New Zealand to enjoy our unspoiled environment, so it's critically important that we bring them here in the most fuel efficient aircraft", no mention of per passenger, no mention that you needed to seat 500 passengers yada yada .....just a pure and simple "most fuel efficient aircraft"

A 744 can offer a per-passenger advantage (i.e 550 pax 744 vs SQ 773ER), 330 can (Mytravel 330 vs SQ 773ER), 340 can (LH 346 to SQ 773ER), sure other aircraft could as well, all depends on how the customer fits it out....without stating the exact configuration, payload, sector, or other metric the statement/comparison is useless...so if your defence of it.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
tdscanuck
Posts: 8572
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 7:25 am

RE: 773ER - Improved Overall Fuel Efficiency

Sat Aug 04, 2007 6:28 pm

Quoting Zeke (Reply 7):
A 737 would burn at least 5t a hour less than a 777, little piston aircraft burn something like 25kg an hour, with is over 8000 kg less an hour than a 777....miles/gallon, 777 is not the most fuel efficient, fuel burn per hour, the 777 is not the most efficient...

The most fuel efficient aircraft in service would have to be a glider, no fuel at all.

Fuel burn per hour is only half of an efficiency calculation. Efficiency is always what you get compared to what you pay. You can't just look at what you pay, ignore what you get, and make efficiency statements.

For the same reason, a glider is not a fuel efficient aircraft...you're looking at what you get without looking at what it cost you.

Tom.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 14626
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: 773ER - Improved Overall Fuel Efficiency

Sat Aug 04, 2007 8:06 pm

Quoting Eatmybologna (Reply 9):
Efficiency is a relative term and in this case Rob Fyfe was obviously referring to CASM (Cost per Available Seat Mile).

Considering like many airlines NZ reports in ASK/RPKs, I don't think you can assume that at all....



I could guarantee that other aircraft flying about that are in a higher density configurations will have a lower CASK than the NZ 773ERs, just by virtue of the space requires for premium cabin configurations. If NZ were to put around 300 passengers in their aircraft, which is about what most operators do with a premium cabin, it still will have a higher CASK than say the Mytravel A333s which have over 400 passengers, or their 332s with over 350 passengers.

I know the comfort level in the Mytravel aircraft will not be the same as the NZ 773ER with a premium cabin, but I am just illustrating that CASK alone is not a useful metric, as airline configuration determines the seat kilometres available.

Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 11):
Fuel burn per hour is only half of an efficiency calculation.

Efficiency of a machine is defined in the the ratio of the effective or useful output to the total input in any system or the ratio of the energy delivered by a machine to the energy supplied for its operation, a glider is therefore infinitely efficient.

Economics and efficiency of a machine are not the same, for example magnetic levitation trains are very efficient as they have low friction and few or no moving parts, but the economics of them are not as good as standard electric trains in terms of passenger or freight load per kilometer.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
ual747-600
Posts: 628
Joined: Fri Sep 24, 1999 12:57 pm

RE: 773ER - Improved Overall Fuel Efficiency

Sat Aug 04, 2007 10:11 pm

Quoting Zeke (Reply 12):
I could guarantee that other aircraft flying about that are in a higher density configurations will have a lower CASK than the NZ 773ERs, just by virtue of the space requires for premium cabin configurations. If NZ were to put around 300 passengers in their aircraft, which is about what most operators do with a premium cabin, it still will have a higher CASK than say the Mytravel A333s which have over 400 passengers, or their 332s with over 350 passengers.

What does this have to do with the article which only compares the fuel efficiency of 777-300ER to A340-600? Doesn't the 300ER burn significantly (double-digit) less fuel than a similarly configured A340-600? I guess you won't be at the HKG airport next month when the first of many new 300ER's arrive for CX.

UAL747-600 Big grin
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 14626
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: 773ER - Improved Overall Fuel Efficiency

Sat Aug 04, 2007 10:17 pm

Quoting UAL747-600 (Reply 13):

What does this have to do with the article which only compares the fuel efficiency of 777-300ER to A340-600?

The article may say that, they quote Boeing, but the Boeing press release does not say that at all.

I went to the source of the article...did you ?
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
PolymerPlane
Posts: 832
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 1:12 am

RE: 773ER - Improved Overall Fuel Efficiency

Sat Aug 04, 2007 10:28 pm

Quoting Zeke (Reply 14):
The article may say that, they quote Boeing, but the Boeing press release does not say that at all.

I went to the source of the article...did you ?

This is a quote from Boeing's press release from its website:

Quote:
With its twin-engine efficiency, the 777-300ER reduces fuel consumption by more than 20 percent per seat compared to its closest competitor, therefore reducing CO2 emissions by more than 20 percent.

http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2007/q3/070803a_nr.html

If its closest competitor is not A346, I don't know what it is. A reasonable man more often than not will make that inference.

Cheers,
PP
One day there will be 100% polymer plane
 
astuteman
Posts: 7071
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

RE: 773ER - Improved Overall Fuel Efficiency

Sat Aug 04, 2007 10:39 pm

Quoting Atmx2000 (Reply 1):
If the range is standard miles, and not nautical miles, then the range is 7900 nm, which is what we know the 773ER to be capable of and is not new

 checkmark 
This appears to me to be old news.
Good news, but old news.

Quoting Pygmalion (Reply 2):
Quote:
said the 777-300ER consumes about 20 percent less fuel per seat than its closest competitor, Airbus SAS' A340-600.



Quoting Pygmalion (Reply 4):
Did they say something inaccurate?

Good question.
Do you think the quote that you posted is beyond question?

Regards
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 14626
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: 773ER - Improved Overall Fuel Efficiency

Sat Aug 04, 2007 10:46 pm

Quoting PolymerPlane (Reply 15):
If its closest competitor is not A346, I don't know what it is. A reasonable man more often than not will make that inference.

A reasonable inference could also be the 744, since that is what it is replacing...Boeing made similar references about the 787, where the compare it to the 767.

One may infer what ones likes, it is not the same as stating "Chicago-based Boeing, which assembles its commercial jets in the Seattle area, said "......

What the Boeing statement says, and what the article quoted Boeing as saying are not the same.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26709
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: 773ER - Improved Overall Fuel Efficiency

Sat Aug 04, 2007 10:55 pm

Quoting Zeke (Reply 17):
A reasonable inference could also be the 744, since that is what it is replacing...

But at that point, why not just say "then NZ's current 747-400 fleet" in the PR?

I do not believe Boeing considers the 747-400 a "competitor" to the 777-300ER, at least in the general sense as (I believe) used in this PR.

I find it more likely that Boeing was just being "polite" in their PR by not specifically saying the A340-600 and the Seattle Post-Intelligencer decided to "spell it out" for their readers and note the competing product.
 
astuteman
Posts: 7071
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

RE: 773ER - Improved Overall Fuel Efficiency

Sat Aug 04, 2007 11:04 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 18):
I find it more likely that Boeing was just being "polite" in their PR by not specifically saying the A340-600

Polite in not making the A346 the explicit competitor that everyone knows it is , or polite in quoting a totally unsubstantiated figure for the general public, and some A-netters, it appears, to consume as gospel ?
 
PolymerPlane
Posts: 832
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 1:12 am

RE: 773ER - Improved Overall Fuel Efficiency

Sat Aug 04, 2007 11:10 pm

Quoting Zeke (Reply 17):
A reasonable inference could also be the 744, since that is what it is replacing...Boeing made similar references about the 787, where the compare it to the 767.

No it could not. Most company never let their own products directly compete with each other, especially publicly. Boeing would not say that 744 compete with 773ER. Boeing never said that 787 beats its closest competitor 767 efficiency by 20%.

This is Boeing's line when comparing 787's efficiency:

Quote:
The Boeing 7E7 Dreamliner is being designed with airlines, passengers, investors and the environment in mind. The technologically advanced airplane will use 20 percent less fuel than today's airplanes of comparable size.

http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2004/q4/nr_041021g.html

If you see Boeing's release saying that 767 is 787's closest competitor, I would like to see that.

While we are at it, I also want to see how can a reasonable man suggest that Boeing would suggest 744 is a 773ER's competitor, let alone saying its closest competitor. If you've ever encountered Boeing's statement in this sort, I would love to see it.

I can show you this one though, directly from Boeing's website:

Quote:
The 777-200LR Worldliner and 777-300ER (Extended Range) are two long-range airplanes that Boeing has developed to offer airlines additional flexibility in serving the nonstop routes that passengers demand. Launched in February 2000, the two airplanes can fly more passengers farther and faster than the competition, the A340-600 and A340-500.

and this:

Quote:
The Boeing 777-200LR Worldliner and 777-300ER have seat-mile costs that are 17 to 19 percent lower than the A340-500 and A340-600 models. Fuel burn is considerably lower -- 20 percent lower per seat for the longer-range 777s -- when compared to the A340-500 and A340-600. The 777 also uses advanced technology that lowers maintenance costs and makes maintenance more efficient.

The Boeing 777-200LR Worldliner and 777-300ER have seat-mile costs that are 17 to 19 percent lower than the A340-500 and A340-600 models. Fuel burn is considerably lower -- 20 percent lower per seat for the longer-range 777s -- when compared to the A340-500 and A340-600. The 777 also uses advanced technology that lowers maintenance costs and makes maintenance more efficient.

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/777family/pf/pf_lrback.html

Which is directly in line with the article of the thread starter.

Cheers,
PP
One day there will be 100% polymer plane
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26709
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: 773ER - Improved Overall Fuel Efficiency

Sat Aug 04, 2007 11:11 pm

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 19):
Polite in not making the A346 the explicit competitor that everyone knows it is , or polite in quoting a totally unsubstantiated figure for the general public, and some A-netters, it appears, to consume as gospel?

I'll take the former, since it sounds nicer. Big grin

As to the latter, Boeing, like Airbus, is always going to quote the most advantageous figures in a piece of marketing. It should be clear to most with some familiarity with the industry that a 77W is not always 20% more efficient then an A346, just as it should be clear that an A350-1000 will not always be 20% more efficient then a 77W.

However, more often then not, the 77W has the advantage over the A346, just as the A3510 should have the advantage over the 77W more often then not. As such, the 77W has enjoyed more sales then the A346 and the A3510 should win more RFPs against the 77W.
 
Lumberton
Posts: 4176
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 7:34 am

RE: 773ER - Improved Overall Fuel Efficiency

Sun Aug 05, 2007 12:49 am

Additional info on this thread started by Wingedmigrator today. The thread was moved to Tech Ops. I recommend reading his assumptions before flaming....
Fuel Burn - How They Stack Up (by WingedMigrator Aug 4 2007 in Tech Ops)


"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
 
haan
Posts: 79
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2004 6:18 pm

RE: 773ER - Improved Overall Fuel Efficiency

Sun Aug 05, 2007 12:50 am

I can tell u that Emirates are so happy with their current 28 B777-300ER's that they have another 32 on order till 2013.
The 300ER's have turned out much more fuel efficient than advertised by Boeing in the beginning. I think it can be controbuted to the GE engines selected to power the majority of the 300ER's. Are there any 300ER's running on RR.
 
Lumberton
Posts: 4176
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 7:34 am

RE: 773ER - Improved Overall Fuel Efficiency

Sun Aug 05, 2007 1:07 am

Quoting Haan (Reply 23):
Are there any 300ER's running on RR.

No. The GE90 is exclusive on the 777-300ER and 777-200LR.
"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
 
haan
Posts: 79
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2004 6:18 pm

RE: 773ER - Improved Overall Fuel Efficiency

Sun Aug 05, 2007 1:18 am

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 24):

Thanx Lumberton. so lets hope the B777-200LR is also more effecient as advertised.
 
Norcal773
Posts: 1059
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2007 8:19 pm

RE: 773ER - Improved Overall Fuel Efficiency

Sun Aug 05, 2007 1:41 am

Quoting Zeke (Reply 5):
The 777 is not the most fuel efficient aircraft, as stated by the Air New Zealand CEO Rob Fyfe.



Quoting Zeke (Reply 7):
A 737 would burn at least 5t a hour less than a 777, little piston aircraft burn something like 25kg an hour, with is over 8000 kg less an hour than a 777....miles/gallon, 777 is not the most fuel efficient, fuel burn per hour, the 777 is not the most efficient...

The most fuel efficient aircraft in service would have to be a glider, no fuel at all.



Quoting Zeke (Reply 10):
The quote was "Tourists come to New Zealand to enjoy our unspoiled environment, so it's critically important that we bring them here in the most fuel efficient aircraft", no mention of per passenger, no mention that you needed to seat 500 passengers yada yada .....just a pure and simple "most fuel efficient aircraft"

 rotfl   rotfl   rotfl 

You're too funny Zeke, too funny. Your 'spin' makes me laugh sometimes. Now I gotta call SQ to make sure they didn't do an equipment change for my next flight home to a Cessna 150.  Yeah sure
If you're going through hell, keep going
 
astuteman
Posts: 7071
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

RE: 773ER - Improved Overall Fuel Efficiency

Sun Aug 05, 2007 1:44 am

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 22):
I recommend reading his assumptions before flaming....

 checkmark 
Agreed  Smile

Regards
 
Molykote
Posts: 1240
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 8:21 pm

RE: 773ER - Improved Overall Fuel Efficiency

Sun Aug 05, 2007 4:31 am

Quoting Zeke (Reply 12):
Efficiency of a machine is defined in the the ratio of the effective or useful output to the total input in any system or the ratio of the energy delivered by a machine to the energy supplied for its operation, a glider is therefore infinitely efficient.

Doesn't this ignore that the glider was towed to altitude?

Isn't an energy input required (by the operator) to guide the glider to the appropriate thermals/etc to stay aloft?

Doesn't the energy exerting pilot have to eat or burn stored energy as a means to this end?

Obviously I'm being playful with my comments (as I believe you were) but I've never heard someone state that a glider is infinitely efficient.
Speedtape - The aspirin of aviation!
 
Qantas744er
Posts: 1206
Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2005 4:36 am

RE: 773ER - Improved Overall Fuel Efficiency

Sun Aug 05, 2007 4:57 am

Man Zeke....the life of an Airbus pilot can be so hard on airliners.net somethimes  Wink

If it ain;t Boeing I ain't goin  Cool

Just Kidding  Silly

People like Rainboe would just love flaming our armchair pilots here  Wink


Leo Big grin
You live and you die, by the FMA
 
Cruiser
Posts: 934
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2005 2:08 am

RE: 773ER - Improved Overall Fuel Efficiency

Sun Aug 05, 2007 5:16 am

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 22):
Additional info on this thread started by Wingedmigrator today. The thread was moved to Tech Ops. I recommend reading his assumptions before flaming....

I have a feeling that based on this chart, the 78710 might be the most popular plane of the 787 lineup!  Smile

James
Leahy on Per Seat Costs: "Have you seen the B-2 fly-by at almost US$1bn a copy? It has only 2 seats!"
 
astuteman
Posts: 7071
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

RE: 773ER - Improved Overall Fuel Efficiency

Sun Aug 05, 2007 5:18 am

Quoting Cruiser (Reply 30):
I have a feeling that based on this chart, the 78710 might be the most popular plane of the 787 lineup!

Provided users only want to fly 6000 miles......  Smile

Regards
 
EI321
Posts: 5028
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 4:43 pm

RE: 773ER - Improved Overall Fuel Efficiency

Sun Aug 05, 2007 5:27 am

Quoting Cruiser (Reply 30):
Quoting Lumberton (Reply 22):
Additional info on this thread started by Wingedmigrator today. The thread was moved to Tech Ops. I recommend reading his assumptions before flaming....

I have a feeling that based on this chart, the 78710 might be the most popular plane of the 787 lineup!

Is that chart is assuming that all of the listed aircraft are flying thr same route? Or is it assuming that thay are flying to their maximum range?
 
brendows
Posts: 801
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 4:55 pm

RE: 773ER - Improved Overall Fuel Efficiency

Sun Aug 05, 2007 5:38 am

Quoting EI321 (Reply 32):
Is that chart is assuming that all of the listed aircraft are flying thr same route? Or is it assuming that thay are flying to their maximum range?

I would recommend that you read the thread WingedMigrator started, there you can find this:

Quote:
(1) all airliners were 'flown' over the same mission length of 6000 nm.

That is the answer to your question.
 
EI321
Posts: 5028
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 4:43 pm

RE: 773ER - Improved Overall Fuel Efficiency

Sun Aug 05, 2007 6:48 am

Quoting Brendows (Reply 33):
Quoting EI321 (Reply 32):
Is that chart is assuming that all of the listed aircraft are flying thr same route? Or is it assuming that thay are flying to their maximum range?

I would recommend that you read the thread WingedMigrator started, there you can find this:

Quote:
(1) all airliners were 'flown' over the same mission length of 6000 nm.

That is the answer to your question.

Thought so. Which make it relevant if we take it at face value only. AFAIK, the fuel burn per seat difference between the 767-300ER and A330-200 is nowhere near 10%.
 
astuteman
Posts: 7071
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

RE: 773ER - Improved Overall Fuel Efficiency

Sun Aug 05, 2007 6:50 am

Quoting Brendows (Reply 33):
I would recommend that you read the thread WingedMigrator started, there you can find this:

Quote:
(1) all airliners were 'flown' over the same mission length of 6000 nm.

 checkmark 
Hence my tounge-in-cheek comment..

Raising the MTOW of the 787-10 to match the range capabilities of the A359 or the A3510, would result in a slight deterioration in fuel burn per seat due to the slightly higher weights.
I suspect that Boeing are thinking very carefully about whether to increase the MTOW of the 787 any (significant) further, because of this.

Regards
 
EI321
Posts: 5028
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 4:43 pm

RE: 773ER - Improved Overall Fuel Efficiency

Sun Aug 05, 2007 7:22 am

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 35):
Raising the MTOW of the 787-10 to match the range capabilities of the A359 or the A3510, would result in a slight deterioration in fuel burn per seat due to the slightly higher weights.

Correct. That chart excludes so many variables. For instance, Lufthana says that the A346 has actuallly the lowest fuel burn per seat in their fleet. Lufthansa also says that the A380 will have about 5% lower fuel burn per seat despits Boeings claim that the Jumbo has a lower fuel burn that the A380. I know for a fact that the SFC of the A340-600s engines have improved by several percent since the type entered service (according to Flight International).
 
Ruscoe
Posts: 1741
Joined: Sun Aug 22, 1999 5:41 pm

RE: 773ER - Improved Overall Fuel Efficiency

Sun Aug 05, 2007 7:39 am

The figure is actually 3.6%, and has been achieved through a lot of small improvements.

Lower weight, being one and I was surprised at the efficiency gained by altering the shape of the fuselage air intakes. Can't remember the figure but was surprised by it.

This is all about shifting the goal posts on the 350-1000 imo.

Ruscoe
 
jetlife2
Posts: 199
Joined: Sun Jul 09, 2006 11:32 am

RE: 773ER - Improved Overall Fuel Efficiency

Sun Aug 05, 2007 8:07 am

Quoting Ruscoe (Reply 37):
The figure is actually 3.6%, and has been achieved through a lot of small improvements.

This is correct. The 3.6% improvement is the improvement from the original pre-EIS predictions for fuel burn, compared with fuel burn for today's configuration. Both airframe and engine improvements are responsible. Engine improvements include: revised compressor clearances; improved high pressure turbine sealing; and new aero in some stages of the low pressure turbine. These improvements have been tested, certified and shipping since about late 2005. The same improvements do indeed appear in the -200LR since the engine bill of materials is common, although to be precise the percent improvement would be different since it is a different airframe.

3.6% fuel burn is very substantial so is worth mentioning, particularly when it is flying, here and now, with oil at $75/bbl.

Cheers
My views are not necessarily the views of the GE Company
 
astuteman
Posts: 7071
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

RE: 773ER - Improved Overall Fuel Efficiency

Sun Aug 05, 2007 11:16 am

Quoting Ruscoe (Reply 37):
and I was surprised at the efficiency gained by altering the shape of the fuselage air intakes. Can't remember the figure but was surprised by it.

I seem to recall that one too. IIRC it was more than 1%.
No small improvement!

Regards
 
andessmf
Posts: 5689
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 8:53 am

RE: 773ER - Improved Overall Fuel Efficiency

Sun Aug 05, 2007 11:35 am

Should this discussion not be steered away from petty A vs B issue to something a little more relevant?

I find it more interesting to note the little increments in efficiency of an airframe as it keeps developing.

I mean, it could even be validly argued that following history, the A380 of 5 years from now will be a better performer than the initial delivery batch. IIRC, manufacturers issue many PIPs (performance improvement packages) thru the life on an airplane. And these PIPs are even applied on existing frames.
 
User avatar
N328KF
Posts: 5946
Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 3:50 am

RE: 773ER - Improved Overall Fuel Efficiency

Sun Aug 05, 2007 11:53 am

Quoting AndesSMF (Reply 40):
And these PIPs are even applied on existing frames.

Yep. The aforementioned 777-300ER improvements (those that were developed after EIS) were offered for retrofit on earlier production units. I am sure that the uptake on those was high.
“In the age of information, ignorance is a choice.”
-Donny Miller
 
Glom
Posts: 2056
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 2:38 am

RE: 773ER - Improved Overall Fuel Efficiency

Sun Aug 05, 2007 9:32 pm

Zeke sure is in a bad mood this thread. Efficiency is the ratio of what you get out to what you put in, not simply the sum total of what you put in. The latter is consumption.

So comparing the fuel burn on a 737 to a 777 is not comparing efficiency but consumption. Yes you put in more fuel to fly a 777, but you are also transporting more seats.
 
boeing767-300
Posts: 625
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2001 11:23 pm

RE: 773ER - Improved Overall Fuel Efficiency

Sun Aug 05, 2007 10:24 pm

Quoting Glom (Reply 42):
Zeke sure is in a bad mood this thread

You are right about that. Give Zeke a break, it was bad enough when CX selected 77W and not more A346... Maybe Zeke been called up for 77W training....  wink 

Quoting Glom (Reply 42):
So comparing the fuel burn on a 737 to a 777 is not comparing efficiency but consumption.

Sales of 77W speak for themselves. I believe A350-1000 will have prove itself first before happy 77W change. Airbus will have to be very careful not ot over promise and under deliver because any more bad press in this department (A358 9)won't help the A351.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 14626
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: 773ER - Improved Overall Fuel Efficiency

Sun Aug 05, 2007 10:37 pm

Quoting Glom (Reply 42):
Zeke sure is in a bad mood this thread. Efficiency is the ratio of what you get out to what you put in, not simply the sum total of what you put in. The latter is consumption.



Quoting Boeing767-300 (Reply 43):
You are right about that. Give Zeke a break, it was bad enough when CX selected 77W and not more A346... Maybe Zeke been called up for 77W training....

Some people just cannot READ

Quoting Zeke (Reply 12):
Efficiency of a machine is defined in the the ratio of the effective or useful output to the total input in any system or the ratio of the energy delivered by a machine to the energy supplied for its operation, a glider is therefore infinitely efficient.

Only when one defines what the metric used for the "effective or useful output" and what "inputs" are to be used can tell what measure of efficiency you are talking about, every example I have given is a VALID measure of efficiency, just because you do not understand this concept, or not brave enough to admit that I could possible be correct, you have to reply on picking on people or personal attacks.

Grow up ... your posts were pure flamebait.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
ual747-600
Posts: 628
Joined: Fri Sep 24, 1999 12:57 pm

RE: 773ER - Improved Overall Fuel Efficiency

Mon Aug 06, 2007 2:16 am

Quoting Zeke (Reply 44):
Only when one defines what the metric used for the "effective or useful output" and what "inputs" are to be used can tell what measure of efficiency you are talking about, every example I have given is a VALID measure of efficiency, just because you do not understand this concept, or not brave enough to admit that I could possible be correct, you have to reply on picking on people or personal attacks.

Again you attempt hijack the thread with inconsequential dribble. Maybe you can tell us why current/former A330 and/or A340 operators like AF, CX, EK, AC, TAM, SQ, Qatar, PR, KL, KE chose 777-300ER over A340-600. I guess the CCQ benefits were outweighed by trivial things like fuel and maintenance savings, eh?

UAL747-600

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos