A 787 does not burn 30% less then a 767. It’s closer to 10%.

Some real UAL examples from today courtesy of the HOWGOZIT.

The 767 from AMS versus the 787 from CDG, both going to IAD. Per great circle mapper the great circle distance difference is 5 miles. 3361nm for AMS and 3356nm for CDG.

UAL #947 767 took off with 107.2k lbs and landed with 13.1

Burn of 94.1 Flight time of 8:29

UAL #914 787-8 took off with 99.2 and landed with 15.5.

Burn of 83.7 Flight time of 8:06


Going eastbound tonight to those same destinations, the flight plans had:

946 to AMS 767. Burn of 73.2. Flight time 6:49

915 to CDG 787. Burn of 67.0. Flight time of 6:36

Obviously loads and weather routes etc will fluctuate the burn totals, but the 787 is not as awesome in comparison as you believe. So depending on what the price for a new 767 might be, that lower capital cost can buy a lot of gas for a “short term” fix for Europe.

DC