Phuket Taxi and Transfers

Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: B777 fuel consumption -v- B787 Dreamliner

  1. #1
    Frequent Flyer kaptainrob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Lannaland
    Posts
    8,705

    B777 fuel consumption -v- B787 Dreamliner

    Boeing recently conducted fuel use comparisons across it's current fleet and the Dreamliner, carrying just 3 pax fewer than a 777, used 30 tonnes less fuel on a Pacific crossing.

    30 tonnes less! Back of ciggy pack calc = 30,000 litres ... not a bad saving in dollar terms.

    Incidentally, a 777 carries 130 tonnes of fuel in total. 60T in belly tank and 35T each wing.

    Consumption [per seat] is similar to its predecessor, the 747, at ~ 2.8L per 100km's.
    Cheers, Rob.
    Lifes journey is not to arrive at the grave safely in a well-preserved body, but to skid in sideways totally worn out, shouting: holy s.h.i.t what a ride!

  2. #2
    Uber Star Soi wanderer Uber Dreamer ผู้เพ้อฝัน
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Soi 6, Pattaya.
    Posts
    2,563
    When the United Dreamliner flew its 1st flight into Mel last month I spoke to one of the Supervisors as I did the water service, noting the ice in the system. He said the Dreamliner flies a bit higher than the other airliners (34 000 ft?) and is designed to fly higher and faster as well, coming in "like a hammer" was his expression. He said they left LAX 30 min late, but arrived 7 min early, passing 3 other aircraft (including a 777) on the route.

  3. #3
    Uber Star Soi wanderer Thai Dreamer ผู้เพ้อฝัน Moo Uaon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    เชียงใหม่
    Posts
    18,937
    higher than the other airliners (34 000 ft?)
    I thought typical long haul was to cruise at around 38-39,000' after some fuel load is burnt off?

    They certainly seem a very economical aircraft.
    FACE YOUR FEARS LIVE YOUR DREAMS

  4. #4
    Frequent Flyer kaptainrob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Lannaland
    Posts
    8,705
    Quote Originally Posted by Moo Uaon View Post
    I thought typical long haul was to cruise at around 38-39,000' after some fuel load is burnt off?

    They certainly seem a very economical aircraft.
    Correct. Typo on Bawdy's behalf perhaps as 787's can go as high as 43,000 feet.
    Cheers, Rob.
    Lifes journey is not to arrive at the grave safely in a well-preserved body, but to skid in sideways totally worn out, shouting: holy s.h.i.t what a ride!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •