Aircraft Fuel Capacities

pillowtester · Wed May 21, 2008 8:20 pm

I'd like to find a list of different airliners and their fuel capacities, for a research project. Is there somewhere I can find this information?

RJdxer · Wed May 21, 2008 8:23 pm

Your best bet to get accurate info would be to post this in tech/ops.

Viscount724 · Wed May 21, 2008 9:03 pm

For current and former Boeing and Douglas/McDonnell Douglas types, click the aircrat type in the first column in following table, then click "Airplane description" for the specific model you're interested in and scroll down a few pages (it's fairly close to the top) and the last column of the table shows "Usable fuel". Some aircraft may have optional supplementary fuel tanks etc. which may not be mentioned.
http://www.boeing.com/commercial/airports/plan_manuals.html

futurecaptain · Wed May 21, 2008 10:05 pm

www.boeing.com
www.airbus.com

pillowtester · Wed May 21, 2008 11:03 pm

How about non-Boeing/Airbus and/or historical aircraft? I have a lot of aircraft specific books, specifically about the 747SP, BAC One-Eleven, Convair 880 & 990, DC-9, MD-80, and a few others... and they usually contain this information. But it'd be really useful to have like a database that contains this.

I noticed that on sites that do contain a lot of aircraft specs, like Wikipedia and even Airliners.net spec database, fuel capacity is always absent. Why is this?

KELPkid · Wed May 21, 2008 11:14 pm

Quoting PillowTester (Reply 4):

I noticed that on sites that do contain a lot of aircraft specs, like Wikipedia and even Airliners.net spec database, fuel capacity is always absent. Why is this?

Probably because there are so many customer options with both tank capacities and the aircraft's maximum gross weight that it might be hard to come up with a truly representative number.

Even if you did know the ultimate fuel capacity, that might not be helpful, because if you fill the tanks all the way up, the bird can rarely take off with a full passenger load. The rule of thumb is that airliners usually have a lot more fuel storage capacity than they can truly use in normal usage...

Starlionblue · Wed May 21, 2008 11:49 pm

Quoting KELPkid (Reply 5):
Even if you did know the ultimate fuel capacity, that might not be helpful, because if you fill the tanks all the way up, the bird can rarely take off with a full passenger load. The rule of thumb is that airliners usually have a lot more fuel storage capacity than they can truly use in normal usage...

Typically with a full fuel load the aircraft can NEVER take off with a full pax load.

474218 · Wed May 21, 2008 11:50 pm

Quoting PillowTester (Reply 4):
How about non-Boeing/Airbus and/or historical aircraft? I have a lot of aircraft specific books, specifically about the 747SP, BAC One-Eleven, Convair 880 & 990, DC-9, MD-80, and a few others... and they usually contain this information. But it'd be really useful to have like a database that contains this.

Here are a few, fuel weight is based on 6.7 lbs per gallon:

747-200B, 361,700 lbs.
DC-10-10, 178,534 lbs.
DC-10-30, 254,700 lbs.
A300B4-200,108,020 lbs.
A300B4-600, 118,390 lbs.
A310-202, 94,800 lbs.
757-200, 78,658 lbs.
767-200, 104,252 lbs.
767-300, 127,300 lbs.
707-320B, 159,898 lbs.
727-200, 70.920 lbs.
737-200, 34,572 lbs.
737-300, 35,912 lbs.
DC-8-55, 156,733 lbs.
DC-8-73, 162,643 lbs.
L-1011-1, 159,560 lbs.
L-1011-200, 178,360 lbs.
L-1011-500, 213,640 lbs.
DC-9-10, 24,273 lbs.
DC-9-50, 28,596 lbs.
DC9-80, 38,725 lbs.

FlyUSCG · Wed May 21, 2008 11:55 pm

Dash8-100/300 is 5,678lbs. I assume the -200 is the same and not totally sure for the -400.

pillowtester · Thu May 22, 2008 12:03 am

Quoting 474218 (Reply 7):
Here are a few, fuel weight is based on 6.7 lbs per gallon:

747-200B, 361,700 lbs.
DC-10-10, 178,534 lbs.
DC-10-30, 254,700 lbs.
A300B4-200,108,020 lbs.
A300B4-600, 118,390 lbs.
A310-202, 94,800 lbs.
757-200, 78,658 lbs.
767-200, 104,252 lbs.
767-300, 127,300 lbs.
707-320B, 159,898 lbs.
727-200, 70.920 lbs.
737-200, 34,572 lbs.
737-300, 35,912 lbs.
DC-8-55, 156,733 lbs.
DC-8-73, 162,643 lbs.
L-1011-1, 159,560 lbs.
L-1011-200, 178,360 lbs.
L-1011-500, 213,640 lbs.
DC-9-10, 24,273 lbs.
DC-9-50, 28,596 lbs.
DC9-80, 38,725 lbs.

Wow thanks that is an incredibly helpful list!

Max Q · Thu May 22, 2008 4:03 am

Those numbers do not agree with the 767 and 727 aircraft I have flown.

For our 767-200 /400 - ER models total capacity is 160,000 lbs +

And our 727-200's had a capacity of 54000 lbs.

FlyUSCG · Thu May 22, 2008 5:35 am

Quoting Max Q (Reply 10):
Those numbers do not agree with the 767 and 727 aircraft I have flown

They also do not agree with Boeings official website

Here are the corrected numbers directly from the Boeing website:

DC-9-15: 24,743
DC-9-51: 24,649
DC-10-10: 145,202
DC-10-30: 245,568
707-320B: 159,828
727-200, 54,846 & 65,700
737-200: 23,182 to 34,572
737-300: 35,584
747-200: 351,150 (with CF6-50E2: 348,635)
747-300: 327,000 (with CF6-50E2: 324,480)
747-400: 360,226 (382,336-GE/383,810-RR&PW with tail fuel)
747-400ER: 425,182 (423,708-GE)
747SP: 326,622 (with CF6-45A2/B2: 334,870; with RB211-524C2: 337,410)
757-200: 75,550
757-300: 76,980
767-200/-400ER: 161,738
767-300ER: 161,740

Quoting PillowTester (Thread starter):
I'd like to find a list of different airliners and their fuel capacities, for a research project. Is there somewhere I can find this information?

But anyway, here is the link to where I found it all. knock yourself out!
http://www.boeing.com/commercial/airports/plan_manuals.html

474218 · Thu May 22, 2008 3:26 pm

Quoting Max Q (Reply 10):
Those numbers do not agree with the 767 and 727 aircraft I have flown.

The fuel capacities I provided were taken from 1981 Lockheed sale brochure and were correct at the time it was published. The brochure was published over 27 years ago, at that time there were no 747-400, 757-300 or 767-300's.

Quoting FlyUSCG (Reply 11):
Here are the corrected numbers directly from the Boeing website:

Quoting FlyUSCG (Reply 11):
But anyway, here is the link to where I found it all. knock yourself out!
http://www.boeing.com/commercial/air....html

However, the numbers listed in the above Boeing manuals is for USABLE fuel not maximum fuel capacity.

CoolGuy · Fri May 23, 2008 3:26 pm

Quoting 474218 (Reply 12):
However, the numbers listed in the above Boeing manuals is for USABLE fuel not maximum fuel capacity.

I'm just curious, what's the difference between the two?

wilco737 · Fri May 23, 2008 3:49 pm

Quoting CoolGuy (Reply 13):
I'm just curious, what's the difference between the two?

Usable fuel - as the name says - is the fuel you can actually use. But there is always a little rest somewhere in the feeding lines and at the bottom of the tank which cannot be used. On the MD11F we have a procedure when low on fuel that we can drain this "unuseable" fuel out of the lines and send it to the engines...

WILCO737 (MD11F)
airplane

474218 · Fri May 23, 2008 6:52 pm

Quoting CoolGuy (Reply 13):
I'm just curious, what's the difference between the two?

Quoting WILCO737 (Reply 14):
Usable fuel - as the name says - is the fuel you can actually use.

Aircraft fuel tanks are not smooth inside, there are stringers, webs and bulkheads inside the tanks. Additionally the boost pump are located in something called a surge box (tank), a structure that keeps the fuel around the pump from splashing about so it can be pulled in to the pump smoothly. Fuel gets trapped around all these structural parts and does not flow in to the surge box, therefore it is unusable.

When work is required inside the tanks the first thing done is to de-fuel the aircraft, then the tanks sump drains are opened and allowed to drain and finally someone has to go into the tanks and either suck the trapped fuel out with a vacuum or blot it up with rags.

CRJ900 · Fri May 23, 2008 7:35 pm

Is there a lot of difference between usable fuel load and max fuel load? Like, 10,000 kgs of max fuel means 9,000 kgs of usable fuel or is it only like 100-200 kgs difference? Or does it vary much depending on aircraft type?

Starlionblue · Fri May 23, 2008 11:36 pm

Quoting CRJ900 (Reply 16):
Is there a lot of difference between usable fuel load and max fuel load? Like, 10,000 kgs of max fuel means 9,000 kgs of usable fuel or is it only like 100-200 kgs difference? Or does it vary much depending on aircraft type?

It's not 10% no. But it is probably 1-2%. Nor sure actually.

tdscanuck · Sat May 24, 2008 1:07 am

Quoting CRJ900 (Reply 16):
Is there a lot of difference between usable fuel load and max fuel load? Like, 10,000 kgs of max fuel means 9,000 kgs of usable fuel or is it only like 100-200 kgs difference? Or does it vary much depending on aircraft type?

Manufacturers try to minimize unusable fuel (it's a useless weight penalty). On a 737 it's on the order of a few hundred points (much less than 1%). It would be similar on most Boeing twins, I suspect. More complex aircraft (quads, Airbii) will have larger unusable reserves because of the larger number of tanks.

Tom.

411A · Sat May 24, 2008 1:40 am

I would strongly suggest that most pay attention to what 474218 has to say, for he is most correct, with his numbers.

Others?
Mostly guessing.

Also, please note that the B707-320 series was the FIRST civil jet transport that could carry more usable fuel than its empty weight.

A fact.

GolfOscarDelta · Sat May 24, 2008 2:27 pm

Quoting WILCO737 (Reply 14):
On the MD11F we have a procedure when low on fuel that we can drain this "unuseable" fuel out of the lines and send it to the engines

Hmmm.. i thought unusable fuel was just that ..well unusable... i thought the only way to drain the unsuable fuel was to

Quoting 474218 (Reply 15):
to de-fuel the aircraft, then the tanks sump drains are opened and allowed to drain and finally someone has to go into the tanks and either suck the trapped fuel out with a vacuum or blot it up with rags.

anyway just curious to know, How do you drain the unsuable fuel and send it to the engines?

The reason i ask is : if this could be done then why not do it always and eliminate the whole "trapped-fuel-and-oil" weight fraction thing while desiging aircraft....

wilco737 · Sat May 24, 2008 2:30 pm

Quoting GolfOscarDelta (Reply 20):
Hmmm.. i thought unusable fuel was just that ..well unusable... i thought the only way to drain the unsuable fuel was to

Under normal conditions this fuel in the fuel lines to the engines isn't usable. But on the MD11F there is a feature to get those 100-200kg out of the fuel lines to the engines. but the fuel which is in the tanks where you cannot get to because of the location of the boost pumps: this remains unusable...

WILCO737 (MD11F)
airplane

GolfOscarDelta · Sat May 24, 2008 2:43 pm

Quoting WILCO737 (Reply 21):
But on the MD11F there is a feature to get those 100-200kg out of the fuel lines to the engines

Hmmm...ok. But again wouldnt this lead to air locks and would you have to drain out all the fuel and do some sort of priming to ge the lines full with fuel (with no air pockets/locks) once you are back on the gorund i.e. like the way you do in diesel cars when all the fuel is drained from the lines (i dunno but for some reason you dont need to do it to petrol cars, only diesels)

wilco737 · Sat May 24, 2008 2:57 pm

Quoting GolfOscarDelta (Reply 22):
Hmmm...ok. But again wouldnt this lead to air locks and would you have to drain out all the fuel and do some sort of priming to ge the lines full with fuel (with no air pockets/locks) once you are back on the gorund i.e. like the way you do in diesel cars when all the fuel is drained from the lines (i dunno but for some reason you dont need to do it to petrol cars, only diesels)

This procedure is only used to get the very last drop of fuel out of the fuel lines. So only if you don't have any fuel on board anymore. Only then you use that procedure and once the fuel is drained out of the fuel lines: the engines will quit because they don't get any fuel anymore. IF we make it safely on the groud then, I must admit: I don't know what maintenance will do, but I will only be glad to be on the ground.

WILCO737 (MD11F)
airplane

Tristarsteve · Sat May 24, 2008 3:16 pm

Quoting CRJ900 (Reply 16):
Is there a lot of difference between usable fuel load and max fuel load? Like, 10,000 kgs of max fuel means 9,000 kgs of usable fuel or is it only like 100-200 kgs difference? Or does it vary much depending on aircraft type?

When we defuel a B737, we turn on the wing boost pumps and open the defuel valve and the fuel is pumped out into the bowser. When the boost pump low pressure lights come on steady, we turn the pumps off. The remaining fuel in the tank is unuseable. We then get a drain cart and place it under the sump drains, and open the drains until it stops dripping. We probably get around 20 gallons from each tank. This is more than the unuseable fuel because if the aircraft was flying it would be pitching and rolling and a lot of this fuel would go into the boost pumps. So unuseable fuel is no more than a few gallons per tank. But there is still small puddles of fuel here and there in the tanks. Not very much but enough to make the smell overpowering inside the tank!

miller22 · Tue May 27, 2008 2:11 pm

Probably the most standardized information on all fuel capacities offered for each aircraft will come from the FAA (or CAA). Go to their website, and do a search for a TCDS (Type Certificate Data Sheet). Airbus is a bit stingy with there's sometimes, but different possible fuel capacities are almost always there.

longhauler · Tue May 27, 2008 2:33 pm

This is a tough question, mainly as many have said above, it really depends on Customer preference.

The best example is when I started flying the B737-200 with Canadi>n. Canadi>n's B737-200s were acquired from all of the component airlines ... CP Air, Pacific Western, Nordair, Transair, Eastern Provincial and Quebecair. Each of these airlines had different requirements and preferences. Therefore when you look at my old B737-200 manual, when looking under fuel capacities, this is what you see:

FIN 791, 792 ... 28,348 Lbs
FIN 701, 767 ... 31,510
FIN 702- 704 ... 31,664
FIN 735, 765 ... 32,046
FIN 736, 794, 795 ... 34,505
FIN 708-716, 719, 721-726, 782, 783 ... 34,545
FIN 705-707, 732, 734, 739-762, 771, 784, 796, 797 ... 34,592
FIN 717, 718, 720, 728-731 ... 39,979 (these ones had four tanks instead of the usual three)

And all of these are B737-200s!!!!

If you want to cross reference, the first page of this manual states that is applicable for the B737-212, 217, 242, 242C, 275, 275C, 296, 2E1, 2K2, 2K9, 2L9, 2Q8, 2T2C, 2T5 and the 2T7 ... what a mess!

vc10 · Tue May 27, 2008 6:27 pm

There was a request for fuel information for aircraft other than Boeing or Airbus

Concorde fuel capacity was 26400 imp gals [ nominal 95568 kgs ] carried in 13 tanks numbered 1 to 11

The Vickers Super VC-10 fuel capacity was !9, 355 imp gallons [ nominal 70,000 kgs] carried in eight tanks,
that is 3 in each wing, one in the fuselage belly , and one in the fin

Now going even further back the Lockheed Constellation 749a total capacity was 5820 US gallons carried in
the 6 wing tanks

Well you did ask for other aeroplanes

littlevc10

[Edited 2008-05-27 11:38:15]

pliersinsight · Tue May 27, 2008 7:25 pm

Quoting Vc10 (Reply 27):
Concorde fuel capacity was 26400 imp gals [ nominal 95568 kgs ] carried in 13 tanks numbered 1 to 11

Was that because having a tank numbered "13" would be.....unlucky? biggrin

vc10 · Tue May 27, 2008 7:38 pm

Quoting Pliersinsight (Reply 28):
Was that because having a tank numbered "13" would be.....unlucky?

I have often thought the same, but It would seem a tradition that British aircraft always had "A" tanks, which I understand stood for "Auxiliary" but could also stand for "After thought" too.

Yes I know that Concorde was half French

littlevc10 Wink

thegeek · Tue May 27, 2008 9:46 pm

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 6):
Typically with a full fuel load the aircraft can NEVER take off with a full pax load.

What about for an A333? I calculate there is room for 2t of cargo if full of fuel, and a full 3 class pax load.

OEW: 124.5t
pax/bags: 29.5t
full fuel: 77t (I've used a specific gravity of 0.8 here)
cargo: 2t
MTOW: 124.5 + 29.5 + 77 + 2 = 233t

larshjort · Tue May 27, 2008 10:07 pm

Quoting CRJ900 (Reply 16):
Is there a lot of difference between usable fuel load and max fuel load? Like, 10,000 kgs of max fuel means 9,000 kgs of usable fuel or is it only like 100-200 kgs difference? Or does it vary much depending on aircraft type?

I know it's not an airliner but it's the only thing I got the numbers on.
The F-16A has a max fuel load of about 6800 lb when we defuel on the ground theres about 300 lb left in the tanks that has to be sucked out with a vacuum cleaner.

/Lars

CRJ900 · Tue May 27, 2008 10:10 pm

Are fully stocked galleys part of Operating Empty Weight?

Apart from the physical galley structure, food/drink/duty free/china and glassware can weigh several tonnes on a long-haul flight.

Quoting Thegeek (Reply 30):
What about for an A333? I calculate there is room for 2t of cargo if full of fuel, and a full 3 class pax load.

OEW: 124.5t
pax/bags: 29.5t
full fuel: 77t (I've used a specific gravity of 0.8 here)
cargo: 2t
MTOW: 124.5 + 29.5 + 77 + 2 = 233t

brons2 · Wed May 28, 2008 12:29 am

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 6):

Typically with a full fuel load the aircraft can NEVER take off with a full pax load.

777-200LR

Max Q · Wed May 28, 2008 3:04 am

VC10, what a great aircraft, rode on it a few times in another life.

The only aircraft I know of that had a fuel tank in the (vertical) fin.

lax25r · Wed May 28, 2008 3:11 am

Quoting FlyUSCG,reply=11 747-400: 360,226 (382,336-GE/383,810-RR&PW with tail fuel)
:

Why the difference among 747-400 with the tail tank between engine types? Where is this extra 500 pounts of fuel going?

Starlionblue · Wed May 28, 2008 3:23 am

Quoting LAX25R (Reply 35):
Why the difference among 747-400 with the tail tank between engine types? Where is this extra 500 pounts of fuel going?

Perhaps because the engines have different weight?

Quoting Brons2 (Reply 33):
Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 6):

Typically with a full fuel load the aircraft can NEVER take off with a full pax load.

777-200LR

Fair enough.

CcrlR · Wed May 28, 2008 3:24 am

Quoting CRJ900 (Reply 32):
Are fully stocked galleys part of Operating Empty Weight?

Apart from the physical galley structure, food/drink/duty free/china and glassware can weigh several tonnes on a long-haul flight.

There are different types weight for an aircraft.
Zero fuel weight is maximum weight permissible which includes pax, crew, and cargo without fuel

Empty Weight plus useful load(pax and cargo) is the maximum weight on the aircraft

Maximum Weight is the maximum weight of the aircraft and its contents

Maximum TakeOff Weight is the maximum weight for takeoff with full pax, cargo, and fuel. Planes are designed to be loaded over the weight maximum but it is not a good idea to do that.

miller22 · Wed May 28, 2008 10:51 am

Quoting CRJ900 (Reply 32):
Are fully stocked galleys part of Operating Empty Weight?

Apart from the physical galley structure, food/drink/duty free/china and glassware can weigh several tonnes on a long-haul flight.

The answer is yes they do. In fact OEW even counts in flight crew and their bags. The problem with OEW is that there is no prescribed OEW for a given aircraft type. I've seen aircraft of the exact same configuration vary in OEW by several thousand pounds. You make it a freighter, and the difference could be in the tens of thousands.

Because of this, manufacturers are hesitant to publish a typical OEW. Makes it hard to find when you need it.

Tristarsteve · Wed May 28, 2008 11:26 am

Quoting Miller22 (Reply 38):
The answer is yes they do. In fact OEW even counts in flight crew and their bags. The problem with OEW is that there is no prescribed OEW for a given aircraft type.

Thanks, I was having trouble with OEW because we don't use it in daily ops.
We have Basic weight. This is the aircraft ready for service, with no crew , catering , payload, or fuel.
This weight is published on a placard in the flight deck, and found by actually weighing the aircraft..
We then add in the catering, and the crew. This changes on each flight. May be 4 pilots on one flight, and 2 on the next. Mybe two full meal services on one, and only sandwiches on the next.
To this is added the payload to get the Zero Fuel Weight, and then the fuel for Taxy weight (minus taxy fuel for Take off weight.).
So as the catering and crew changes regularly, how can an OEW be published?

Yes we actually weigh the aircraft. You drain the fuel tanks, service the toilets and the water tank, remove all the catering and clean the aircraft. Then you put it on some scales. They look just like your bathroom scales at home, but are connected to a computor which can calculate the weight and centre of gravity (basic index).
Sometimes the weight placard is individual to an aircraft, but our fleets of A319 and A320 have a standard weight for each fleet. Makes the dispatchers job much simpler!!

The crew and catering weights are standards. i.e. the catering is Scale A or B or C.

FlyUSCG · Wed May 28, 2008 10:49 pm

Quoting LAX25R (Reply 35):
Why the difference among 747-400 with the tail tank between engine types? Where is this extra 500 pounts of fuel going?

Without going back to the website and looking at the exact tables, the difference was in the engine type. The tail fuel was the same in all. But with every type of 747, the fuels differed based on the engine it was carrying. I'm not sure exactly why, but Starlionblue may have found a good reason. But at the same time, the 747-200/-300 had the CF6 as the only engine with a separate weight while the GE and RR were the same.

thegeek · Wed May 28, 2008 11:30 pm

Quoting TristarSteve (Reply 39):
So as the catering and crew changes regularly, how can an OEW be published?

Fair question. I believe they state: "Typical OEW". That's probably based on 2 pilots only.

Obviously different airlines have different interior fittings as well - heavier or lighter seats especially.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net