Airplane vs. Car Fuel Economy

[MCSL]

With cars, you measure miles per gallon in how far the vehicle (with only the driver on board) can travel on one gallon of gas. The average number of people in a vehicle is 1.58 for cars and 1.73 for SUVs.

With airplanes, it's how far one seat can travel on one gallon of jet fuel (seat*miles/gallon) – assuming the plane is full.

Best in fuel economy: Alaska Airlines

Boeing says its 777-200ER wide-body jet gets nearly 82 miles to the gallon with 301 seats, all full, on a 3,000-mile trip. But increase the flight to 6,000 miles, and the same plane only gets 76 seat-mpg.

The Airbus A380 super-jumbo, the largest passenger airplane in the world with more than 500 seats, averages about 65 seat-miles per gallon, Airbus says. The A320, a single-aisle plane with about 150 seats, averages roughly 77 seat miles to the gallon, according to the manufacturer.

The sweet spot for fuel economy is the single-aisle jet, often producing mpg better than bigger planes and superior to smaller regional jets as well. Boeing says the champ in its current line-up is the 737-900 with 180 passengers flying 1,000 miles. It gets nearly 99 seat-mpg. The plane with the best average mpg in Airbus's current line-up is the A320 family.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704901104575423261677748380.html

http://www.mpgillusion.com/2011/03/more-on-airplane-mpg.html

http://truecostblog.com/2010/05/27/fuel-efficiency-modes-of-transportation-ranked-by-mpg/

http://www.bts.gov/publications/national_transportation_statistics/html/table_04_22.html

http://si.wsj.net/public/resources/images/PJ-AW431_midsea_G_20100811210020.jpg

[MCSL]

Alaska Airlines Fleet

Boeing 737-900

http://www.alaskaair.com/content/travel-info/fleet/737-900.aspx

Bombardier Q400

http://www.alaskaair.com/content/travel-info/fleet/q400.aspx

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4GdRnKb2JrA

[MCSL]

Boeing 737-900

Combined Fuel Economy: 99 seat-mpg (full of passengers)

Range: 3150 miles

Cruise Speed: 500 mph

Number of seats: 180

Load Factor: 80%

Actual seat-mpg = 99 x 0.8 = 79

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/737family/pf/pf_900ERtech.html

http://www.alaskaair.com/content/travel-info/fleet/737-900.aspx

http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2001/photorelease/q1/010330a.jpg

[MCSL]

Toyota Prius

Combined Fuel Economy: 50 mpg (1 driver, no passenger)

Range: 600 miles

Cruise Speed: 60 mph

Number of seats: 5

Actual seat-mpg = 1.58 x 50 = 79

http://www.toyota.com/prius-hybrid/

http://www.hybridcars.com/files/2010-prius-2-610.jpg

[Dave 330i]

What else is important to one who is traveling from point A to point B? Certainly, seat-mile/gallon is probably one of the least important factor.

[hectanooga]

Does this take into account all the fuel burned while on the ground?

[cwsqbm]

Take a long family trip (like the times you'd typically take a plane), and a car looks a lot better. That 18mpg Suburban is now getting 162 seat-miles per gallon when full up, and the Prius is getting 200 seat-miles per gallon with four in the car. The lower utilization for cars includes mostly local trips - trips a plane is absolutely useless.

For real efficiency, take a train or boat.

[MCSL]

New 737

SEATTLE, Aug. 30, 2011 /PRNewswire/ -- Boeing (NYSE: BA) has unveiled the 737 MAX, the name of the new engine variant of the market-leading 737 launched today.

The new family of aircraft – 737 MAX 7, 737 MAX 8 and 737 MAX 9 – builds on the strengths of the Next-Generation 737.

"The 737 MAX offers airlines the right solution and the best choice for creating the most successful future with improved profitability," said Nicole Piasecki, vice president of Business Development and Strategic Integration, Boeing Commercial Airplanes. "The 737 MAX will deliver maximum efficiency, maximum reliability and the Boeing Sky Interior will continue to offer maximum passenger comfort. We call it the 737 MAX because it optimizes everything we and our customers have learned about designing, building, maintaining and operating the world's best single-aisle airplane."

The 737 MAX will deliver big fuel savings that airlines will need to successfully compete in the future. Airlines will benefit from a 7 percent advantage in operating costs over future competing airplanes as a result of optimized CFM International LEAP-1B engines, more efficient structural design and lower maintenance requirements.

Airlines will continue to benefit from maximum reliability. The 737 MAX will build upon the Next-Generation 737's highest reliability performance of any airplane in the world – 99.7 percent on-time departure rate.

The 737 MAX will deliver passenger appeal through the new 737 Boeing Sky Interior. The powerful appeal of the new interior comes from the most spacious cabin headroom, overhead bins that disappear into the ceiling yet carry more bags and LED lighting that brings any color into the cabin.

http://boeing.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=43&item=1908

http://www.newairplane.com/737/737Max/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i_kKD6g53AA

http://leehamnews.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/737max.jpg

[MCSL]

New 737 Engine

WEST CHESTER, Ohio - 30 August 2011 - The Boeing Company made the announcement regarding the Board of Director's approval to launch the new engine variant of the Boeing 737 powered by CFM International's LEAP-1B engine.

"Our relationship with Boeing goes back more than 30 years and even we could not have predicted the phenomenal success the CFM-powered Boeing 737 program has enjoyed," said CFM President and CEO Jean-Paul Ebanga. "This is the best-selling aircraft/engine combination in aviation history. I believe we have achieved that status because we have consistently worked together to refine and improve the airplane/engine combination. This new airplane will provides exceptional operating economics and provide customers with unprecedented levels of efficiency and environmental responsibility while maintaining the legacy of aviation's most reliable product line.

"The CFM-powered 737 aircraft being delivered today represents three decades of leading-edge technical innovation and we look forward to taking that technology to a whole new level with the LEAP-powered 737."

The LEAP-1B will be the exclusive powerplant for the new 737 variant, with the engine uniquely optimized for the airplane. CFM has been collaborating with Boeing on various engine options for either a new or re-engined 737 aircraft since 2005. The two companies are now working to define the final LEAP-1B engine configuration.

http://www.cfm56.com/state-of-the-art

http://www.geae.com/aboutgeae/presscenter/cfm56/leap-x/leap_20110830.html

http://www.geae.com/engines/commercial/cfm56/

http://www.cfm56.com/pdf/leap-brochure.pdf

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qcuS9-3-_Io

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/39/CFM_LEAP-X.jpg/300px-CFM_LEAP-X.jpg

[MCSL]

Does this take into account all the fuel burned while on the ground?

Alaska Airlines changed procedures for ground workers so that electrical power is plugged into arriving flights within five or 10 seconds of setting the parking brake, letting pilots shut down engines faster. That and other changes on the ground have saved an estimated 1.8 million gallons of gas a year.

[wyb]

Alaska Airlines changed procedures for ground workers so that electrical power is plugged into arriving flights within five or 10 seconds of setting the parking brake, letting pilots shut down engines faster. That and other changes on the ground have saved an estimated 1.8 million gallons of gas a year.

what about all the flights where the plane is nowhere near full - all those calcualtions above work out based on a full plane...

the car/suv calculations use "average number of passengers" - while the airline figures work on a "full plane" - how realistic is that?

We've all been on flights that are full I expect - and also ones where they are nearly empty... I flew cross-country no a 737 with 10 passengers plus the crew on once... that wasn't a really efficient flight in terms of fuel... :dunno:

[Dave 330i]

American airlines tried to be fuel conscientious when they decided to taxi using only one engine. Does anyone know how that idea turned out? Are they still doing it?

To pick one, the MD-80, a twin-engine narrowbody with seating for about 140, will save 2.4 gallons per minute on a single-engine taxi. If a trip to or from the runway takes seven minutes (hopeful in many cases), that's close to 34 gallons per flight (17 per taxi in/taxi out). Using the January 2005 average price per gallon of $1.30 presents a savings of about 44 dollars. Assuming an MD-80 flies three legs in a day, that's $132 per day, per aircraft. For a carrier like American Airlines, with more than 350 MD-80s in its fleet, the saving would be at least $46,000 per day, and more than $16 million a year, on that model alone.

Theoretically anyway. American claims it saved $2 million last year through increased use of single-engine taxiing. As you might expect, such procedures aren't always practical or possible. The rules vary markedly between airline and aircraft type, and are subject to a slew of fine print - weather conditions, mandatory cool-down or spool-up times, etc.

The price of jet fuel, much like that of automobile gasoline, varies from region to region, airport to airport. A gallon in Houston might run five cents less than New York; a gallon in Singapore a nickel cheaper still; subject to any number of local taxes, fees, and add-ons. This is one of the reasons planes sometimes "tanker" extra fuel between cities.

After considering ETOPS and single-engine taxi, undoubtedly a number of people will be wondering about something, so allow me to make the following declaration: Under no circumstances whatsoever do crews shut down engines during flight to save money. :rofl: Heck, they do that to the cylinders in car engines.

[MCSL]

Boeing ecoDemonstrator Program

Reducing fuel consumption, carbon emissions and community noise are the focus as Boeing (NYSE: BA) and American Airlines (NYSE: AMR) announced that the airline will be the launch customer for the evolutionary ecoDemonstrator Program. A Boeing Next-Generation 737-800 aircraft will be used to flight test and accelerate the market readiness of emerging technologies.

“We are proud to have American Airlines as our launch partner for this new generation of technology that can bolster aviation’s role as the most efficient means of global transportation,” said Boeing Vice President of Environment and Aviation Policy Billy Glover. “There’s no better way to prepare advanced technologies for market entry than flying them and no better choice than the best selling single-aisle airplane of all time — the Boeing Next-Generation 737.”

“American Airlines recognizes our responsibility to minimize our impact on the environment as much as possible, and we look for every opportunity to do so,” said Captain John Hale, American’s vice president – Flight. “Our partnership with Boeing allows us to make significant strides in putting more fuel-efficient planes in the air, which is the most effective way to reduce our carbon footprint. We remain committed to identifying and implementing new technologies and programs that further our environmental performance.”

The American Airlines 737-800, and a twin-aisle airplane that will be announced at a later date, are serving as the flight test component for the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) Continuous Lower Energy Emissions Noise (CLEEN) program – along with other technologies developed by Boeing and other industry partners. Together with the American Airlines engineering team, Boeing is finalizing plans for installing the initial technology applications aboard the first airplane. Specific technologies that will be flown in 2012 include:

• Adaptable trailing edge technology – a technology being developed under the FAA CLEEN Program, it reduces noise and emissions during all phases of flight including take-off, cruise and landing.

• Variable area fan nozzle – reduces community noise and enables advanced engine efficiency technologies.

• Flight trajectory optimization for in-flight planning – enables airlines to determine and fly more fuel-efficient routes and provides flight crews the ability to reroute for weather and other constraints.

• Regenerative fuel cells for onboard power – efficiently stores and generates power, and adapts to aircraft electrical systems demand, potentially reducing weight, fuel burn and CO2 emissions.

“Our ecoDemonstrator flight test program allows us to accelerate promising technologies and move them onto airplane models and into new aircraft design considerations across the industry,” said Boeing ecoDemonstrator Program Manager David Akiyama. “It also allows us to verify airplane applicability and identify and eliminate potential integration challenges.”

http://blog.seattlepi.com/aerospace/2011/06/22/american-to-launch-boeing-ecodemonstrator-program/

http://www.newairplane.com/environment/

http://www.sae.org/dlymagazineimages/9982_11842_ART.jpg

http://blog.seattlepi.com/aerospace/files/2011/06/american-boeing-ecodemonstr.jpg

[cwsqbm]

I flew cross-country no a 737 with 10 passengers plus the crew on once... that wasn't a really efficient flight in terms of fuel... :dunno:

I flew Chicago to Portland on a 757 that had 6 passengers.

I also flew Chicago to Tokyo on a very empty 747. I don't know how many people but my four coworkers and I had the entire downstairs business class section to ourselves. (War with Iraq had just started, and SARS had many Japanese afraid to travel.)

[cmac2012]

what about all the flights where the plane is nowhere near full - all those calcualtions above work out based on a full plane...

the car/suv calculations use "average number of passengers" - while the airline figures work on a "full plane" - how realistic is that?

We've all been on flights that are full I expect - and also ones where they are nearly empty... I flew cross-country no a 737 with 10 passengers plus the crew on once... that wasn't a really efficient flight in terms of fuel... :dunno:

That was my thought. I've read here and there that av. pmpg is about 50 on jetliners, averaged out. I often do the Craigslist carpool thing from the Bay area to WA state and it sure feels like a lot less $$ to me. Of course wear and tear is extra. A few years back I had to make it to a wedding so I flew and got a rental car - about $800 for a four day stay. If I carpool, I'm out maybe $50 to $100.

Less cash out of my pocket doesn't necessarily equate to less carbon per person but the consensus I've encountered is that 3 people or more in a relatively efficient car will exceed airliners in efficiency.

[kugasman]

I'll bet a prius will never get 50 mpg with four passengers.

Sent from my PC36100 using Bimmer