Fuel Burn

Reply Subscribe

Page 2 of 6

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

01-09-2008, 06:59 PM

#11

cbire880

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Apr 2007

Position: E170 FO

Posts: 686

Quote:

Originally Posted by btwissel

at most altitudes we fly (above 290) the 170 burns between 1800 and 1900lbs/hr/side.

we generally block anywhere from 2200lbs burn for short legs (IND-ORD short) up to 12000lbs burn (IAD-AUS or ORD-ABQ)

Is that at .78? I wanna say second hour burn is closer to 1600/side at .74 for us. That fat fuselage does take some dinosaurs to run up in the sky. Yeah, you thought it was rain.

01-09-2008, 07:03 PM

#12

visceral

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Mar 2006

Posts: 187

Average of 1000 -1100 lbs an hour for the mighty Saab "whisper jet" 340. That ain't per engine by the way.

01-09-2008, 07:22 PM

#13

SharkAir

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Apr 2007

Posts: 492

The Twin Otter could carry 23 jumpers in first class comfort at ~600 pph.

01-09-2008, 07:51 PM

#14

andy171773

Furlough line holder

Joined APC: Jan 2007

Position: CRJ2, ATR, CRJ7, E145, 737

Posts: 1,845

5.4 gallons per hour at FL 030 at 2300 RPM on a standard day in my handy dandy C-152RJ

01-09-2008, 10:22 PM

#15

hotelmode

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Dec 2007

Position: ATR-72 FO

Posts: 297

ATR-72 burns 1600 lbs/hr combined.

01-09-2008, 10:42 PM

#16

btwissel

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Sep 2006

Position: Q400 survivor

Posts: 537

Quote:

Originally Posted by cbire880

Is that at .78? I wanna say second hour burn is closer to 1600/side at .74 for us. That fat fuselage does take some dinosaurs to run up in the sky. Yeah, you thought it was rain.

i'm just going off the dispatch paperwork and what i notice when i look over at the EICAS between articles from the newspaper/magazine.

.78, but i've noticed each .01 we pull it back brings the burn down about 100lbs a side.

01-09-2008, 11:53 PM

#17

sinsilvia666

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Jun 2007

Posts: 664

We got a 172R down to 3 gph once lol

01-10-2008, 02:35 AM

#18

ChinsFive

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Sep 2007

Posts: 181

Quote:

Originally Posted by ExperimentalAB

It's too bad that Mainline (insert your choice here) has shown time and again that they really don't care for comfort...It's fuel they are worried about - and the E-Jets, though awesome to catch a ride in, are guzzlers in comparison to the RJ's.

Sweet dude, you found another thing that makes SKYW great. Just chill with your comparison stuff already. You haven't even been in the game a year yet.

01-10-2008, 05:31 AM

#19

KiloAlpha

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Nov 2005

Position: AA A320

Posts: 1,624

I almost never get filed at .74 on the Republic side. Then again, I haven't done a MCI, MSP, or IAH turn all that recently.

Anyone remember what the "plan" fuel numbers were for first and second hour on the 170. Were they 4200# and 3600# respectively?

Last edited by KiloAlpha; 01-10-2008 at 05:36 AM.

01-10-2008, 06:00 AM

#20

JohnnyCochran

On Reserve

Joined APC: Apr 2006

Position: F/O

Posts: 22

ON the 170 play with the Perf Init's cruise speed once enroute. I've found with tailwinds on long legs dfw-dca for instance you can save a good amount of gas by finding an optimum speed for the weight.

When you first hit cruise and are heavy .70 can actually burn more gas than .74....but once the weight burns as the flight continues pulling it back can easily save a 1000 pounds of gas versus the planned burn. 1600 a side is average on the longer legs depending on weight....but around 1200-1400 per hour once a little lighter and its pulled back. Headwinds are a different story, last week we had a planned burn of 14200 dca-dfw (150-160 kt hdwind)

Whats wrong with pulling it back as long as you arrive on time?