Go Back   FlyerTalk Forums > Travel&Dining > TravelBuzz
Sign in using an external account

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old May 10, 08, 8:48 pm   #1
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Victoria, B.C.
Programs: Hyatt Diamond, AS MVPG, AA ExPlat
Posts: 1,363
Which jet aircraft is the most fuel efficient

With the rising oil prices lately, it got me thinking about the future of air travel. Who knows is there will be air travel in 20 years if we run out of oil.

Anyhow I was thinking is the A380 the most fuel efficient per passenger? Their website touts this as one of the big advantages. Or is is some other aircraft. I see more and more 737's these days and lot of flights on CRJ

I much prefer the widebodies but understand that we need to conserve fuel. I remember when you could fly to HNL on a 747, then a DC10, then a 757 and my last flight on AS on a 737... maybe next year it will be a CRJ.

Just curious as to what the most fuel efficient jet aircraft is?
smilee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 10, 08, 9:12 pm   #2
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: ACT/GRK/DAL/ABI/MIA/FLL
Programs: OMNIArchist, OMNIArchy!, OMNIIDGAS
Posts: 23,478
Q400

It has a prop but it is a jet!

Also I might add, many metrics for it, per seat if full, and outright, the figures really all depend upon the oad factor.

That being said the RJ's in general are HORRIBLE on fuel economy.
Steph3n is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 11, 08, 9:15 am   #3
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: BNA
Programs: UA PP, PC Plat, HH Diamond
Posts: 5,002
The 757/A320 size seems to be a sweat spot. As you move bigger, or smaller, the cost per seat-mile increases. Newer designs are better than older designs, obviously, so a newer design that's farther from the optimum size will likely do better than an older one that's closer.

I don't know how well the newer technology in the A380 does at overcoming it's very large size. It may do quite well. The 787 should be an efficiency leader when it enters the market as well.
LarryJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 11, 08, 11:38 am   #4
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Programs: statusless these days
Posts: 17,706
The key for most a/c is keeping the seats occupied though that won't help you much on older a/c such as DC9s, 727s, DC-10s and L-1011s (as well as other older a/c).

Quote:
Originally Posted by LarryJ View Post
The 757/A320 size seems to be a sweat spot.
757 is good when it's used for ranges beyond 1,800-2,500 miles (but under a trans-Atlantic?) as it can carry more pax/cargo and fuel for these flights and overcome its weight penalty for shorter flights (where the lighter but shorter-legged A321 is better).

The 320s seems to be optimized for flights less than 2,000 miles which is why they have trouble with transcontinentals in the U.S. (ask B6). 321s and 3192 have just that extra range to fly U.S. transcontinentals.

Quote:
I don't know how well the newer technology in the A380 does at overcoming it's very large size.
Reportedly the A380 at 80% pax does as well as a fully loaded 744.
__________________
Drifting aimlessly between YVR and YLW
YVR Cockroach is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 11, 08, 11:42 pm   #5
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,278
Quote:
Originally Posted by YVR Cockroach View Post


Reportedly the A380 at 80% pax does as well as a fully loaded 744.
The way I understood the boast of SQ, their A380 has 20 % lower fuel burn per seat fully loaded with 471 passengers compared to B747-400 with 375 seats - which means that a fully loaded A380 fuel burn matches carrying 376,8 seats on B747, and the total fuel cost per trip is only 0,5 % bigger. The extra volume of A380 over B747 is basically free.
chornedsnorkack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 12, 08, 3:27 am   #6
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Programs: Mile-High Club, Marriott Plt, SPG P-75, PC Plt, Hyatt Dia, Carlson Gold, BW Dia
Posts: 1,837
I'm assuming the OP is referring to civilian passenger jets, but without looking at any data, I'd put money on the U-2/TR-1 spyplanes-- especially if they have done a turbofan reftrofit since the early 1960s.

Of course, the killer is the per-pax fuel burn, since the darn thing only holds one person.
Jazzop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 12, 08, 9:56 am   #7
Suspended
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,275
I thought the A380 was the most fuel efficient if all the seats are occupied. If only 1 or 2 seats are occupied, it's the worse.

If the trip is short, such as Toledo, Ohio to Detroit, then possibly the Q400 is the most fuel efficient.

The joke answer would be any jet that is parked. That would use no fuel. It's not a joke completely as if you want to save gas, stay home and don't take that trip on your hybrid car.
797-3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 12, 08, 10:11 am   #8
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,278
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jazzop View Post
I'm assuming the OP is referring to civilian passenger jets, but without looking at any data, I'd put money on the U-2/TR-1 spyplanes-- especially if they have done a turbofan reftrofit since the early 1960s.

Of course, the killer is the per-pax fuel burn, since the darn thing only holds one person.
Hardly. I think that the most fuel efficient jet is Cri-Cri. Which is definitely better than Global Flyer...
chornedsnorkack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 12, 08, 6:02 pm   #9
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: ?
Posts: 7,544
Quote:
Originally Posted by 797-3 View Post
The joke answer would be any jet that is parked. That would use no fuel. It's not a joke completely as if you want to save gas, stay home and don't take that trip on your hybrid car.
That was going to be my answer--any grounded jet is very fuel-efficient!
__________________
Enjoy your worries, you may never have them again
BNA_flyer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 12, 08, 6:46 pm   #10
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: SAN
Programs: PR Premier Elite, BR Silver
Posts: 1,773
AC once flew a 767 almost 50 miles without using any fuel at all.
Mabuk dan gila is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 12, 08, 6:48 pm   #11
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: ACT/GRK/DAL/ABI/MIA/FLL
Programs: OMNIArchist, OMNIArchy!, OMNIIDGAS
Posts: 23,478
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mabuk dan gila View Post
AC once flew a 767 almost 50 miles without using any fuel at all.
link? This is interesting, they flew on what? even battery power is still a 'fuel'
Steph3n is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 12, 08, 6:52 pm   #12
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Programs: HH S
Posts: 583
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steph3n View Post
link? This is interesting, they flew on what? even battery power is still a 'fuel'
bad joke but google for Gimli glider
Polar Man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 12, 08, 11:08 pm   #13
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: ACT/GRK/DAL/ABI/MIA/FLL
Programs: OMNIArchist, OMNIArchy!, OMNIIDGAS
Posts: 23,478
I think I just found the record setter:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virgin_...ic_GlobalFlyer
Steph3n is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 13, 08, 9:15 am   #14
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,278
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mabuk dan gila View Post
AC once flew a 767 almost 50 miles without using any fuel at all.
Air Transat got considerably further. A330 is more efficient...
chornedsnorkack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 13, 08, 9:34 am   #15
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: BNA
Programs: UA PP, PC Plat, HH Diamond
Posts: 5,002
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steph3n View Post
link? This is interesting, they flew on what?
Potential energy which was converted into kinetic energy.
LarryJ is offline   Reply With Quote
 
 
Reply

Bookmarks


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 6:19 am.