One fact that was missed from this particular video... jet fuel is not taxed like petrol or diesel in your car. If it was, then the airplane would lose the battle. It only wins because the airline industry has friends in high places (no pun intended).
on the other hand those taxes are for maintaining the road so it makes no sense to charge them just like offroad fuel is also untaxed, unless we start charging carbon taxes
79% of people that haven't subscribed, but a lot of the channels I watch have less than 5% subscribed, so you're doing better than most 😁 yes, I'm subscribed 😉
I commuted to work for years and the pilot of the 737 told us it took 7 gallons per person in a full plane to take us 631 miles. When you think about that and it only took 1 hr and 40 minutes it is pretty amazing.
Meh, not really.. With a sufficiently designed boat, you could probably take a similar mass than the said 737 a similar distance on the sea with a similar amount of fuel as per person. Of course it would take a week or thee, but..
Thank you for pointing out the economics of air travel. What we tend to overlook is the incredible speeds that these machines are capable of while delivering a low passenger seat mpg. As we know, speed costs $$
Well, I don't think comparing the fuel consumption of an almost fully loaded airplane on a long distance flight with the consumption of a car that has just one person in it. You'll have to put 4 people in the car (which normally would take up to 5 people) in order to have a fair comparison - or take 3 people for the car and 400 people for the plane - that'll be more realistic anyway.
I actually think a lot about fuel burn. If you think about it, 1 gallon per second isn't a lot. You figure you're going a mile each 6 seconds, so that's only six gallons per mile, carrying hundreds of people. As a fun aside, you can measure the speed pretty well when flying over the central US where the roads are a mile apart. It will be a little under 6 seconds between when each road passes under the edge of the wing.
But then again... 6 gallons per mile would allow for with mpg you could run ~355 Toyota Priuses (59mpg/0.166mpg) the same distance. With electric vehicles that number would also be around twice as high if ee consider the MPGe. Also 355 priuses would weigh around 500 tons, though also considerably more if you were to carry 4 passengers in each.
Types of normal fuel load: Trip fuel, diversion fuel, reserve fuel, contingency fuel, taxi fuel and some additional fuel Air Canada Flight 143: What trip fuel?
The world is metric. I've subscribed this very interesting channel, but will unsubscribe, if finally you don't learn, that the metric system is world standard. It is for fueling a plane, as it is for all kinds of scientists. Even in the USA, Australia and the UK, although still not used in public. Not using metric lead to crashed Mars probes and sailing passenger planes without fuel. Use terms, that are used worldwide within the industry, fuel is liters, weight is kilograms, distances are nautical miles. If someone is here for indepth information about airplane industry, he'll know the terms and can work with that. Although I like the simple flying A 380 very much. Keep on with your excellent work, but keep industry terms, not those from the grocery store.
Where do they put the fuel? How do they manage “Sloshing” movement of large amounts of fuel. How long does it take to file a plane… how much fuel comes out of those hoses compared to a fire hose or other high pressure hoses..? So many questions…
Fuel is stored in the wings and centre fuselage tanks. Some large aircraft even store fuel in the tail. Tanks are often design with bulkhead webs or baffles to reduce sloshing. Some even use foam I believe. Fueling times vary depending on the amounts, among already onboard, number of hoses, type of aircraft etc. Fuelling hoses generally operate at approximately 50 psi if my memory serves me right. Note: I was a fuel tank repair mechanic for a number of years.
Hi, maintenance technician here. We have an *old* refueling trailer at work when our 737 come and go. Ours is rated for 600L per minute, I'm guessing newer ones may push more than that. Takes about half an hour to fill our 737-400 to the brim. And as the other commenter said, there are baffles in the tanks to reduce sloshing. Every couple of baffles, one is completely watertight in one way with valves to let the fuel flow inboard but not outboard.
Modern jet engines only use 22 percent of there power when at there cruising altitudes where there is less air density which means less drag for them, in fact at take off a jet engine needs to use full power, 100 percent engine power available to it because of the air drag.
What about short flights with small private jets? Or any large pleasure vehicle. Hate seeing someone in some huge 4x4 vehicle, truck is one thing but you don't need no hummer. Or the 100k pickup just to drive to your office job.
Why are you using a 747-400, an aircraft that has been retired by almost all airlines? I know it is the extreme example, but it would have been better to compare an efficient 787 with other fleets.
Depending upon the aircraft Type, the fan-jet, turbo-prop, pure turbo jet, reportedly consume more petro based fuel per person (passenger) than competitive forms of transport. The trade-off is speed/time. Please consult the various websites that report estimations of fuel-burn and related yields of pollutants that are emitted by aircraft. Keep in mind that over 10,000 aircraft are said to be airborn at any one time around be this planet. If you live under a flight path, you're already polluted, same as living nearby to any major autoroute. We inhale minute particles of spent petroleum fuels, automobile cast-offs such as brake pad and fanbelt residue, and everything else that can be expended for the sake of producing and converting heat energy into kinetic motion. That is the basic reason why life as we know it on planet Earth is imperiled.
@0:52 the calculation of Conversion of 18000 Gals is Wrong, it should be 18000 x 3. 79= 68,220. But you guys have written 68.137 L which is too small compared to the 18000 even.
Talking about KLM... They are so focused on cutting back carbon emission, that they extended the gas-guzzling 747s for as long as possible... (even if they could have easily replaced them years ago for more environmental-friendly airplanes)
@@MarcusNesbitt4 That is a great excuse! KLM should fly the old Air France A380s. Like that, no new 777x need to be produced... (Would you really believe such a marketing scam?)
@@MarcusNesbitt4 Same applies to cars. 40% of carbon emmissions over the lifetime of the average car is taken up manufacturing all of the components and materials and final assembly. Not sure what the ratio is for aircraft, probably less, but your point is valid.
@@briandicks3805 Who is the sheep? I would say it is you. I've worked on many large aircraft. I have been inside the wing, I have fueled them. What is your experience with aircraft?
This is silly! The comparison must be based on trip, not vehicle. To fly from NYC to London on the most efficient planes available ( 787 & A350 ) with all seats occupied burns about 40-45 gallons of fuel per seat. That’s not terrible, until you think how long it takes the average driver to use 40-45 gallons of fuel. Frequent and or long-distance flying is about the most environmentally damaging thing you can do as an individual, far worse than driving. The real issue is whether the trip should be made at all. I am not a green zealot - I love to fly and I do fly.
If your car is carrying one person then you should compare the plane with one person. I take 5 people in my car, so leave me alone, the best I ever got was 80 to the gallon.
According to a UA-cam channel planes only need fuel to get them in the air; then once buoyant they only require air to keep the turbines turning. *Don't kill the messenger* It seems pretty convincing to me. 😐 _Watch the channel first before you opinionate in the commentary please._
A typical passenger commercial jet gets .2 miles per gallon or, 5 gallons per mile. A greyhound bus gets 6 miles per gallon To fly the New York Jets football team from New York to Pittsburgh takes approximately 1400 to 1600 gallons of jet fuel.. that does not take into consideration the amount of fuel used while in a holding position, waiting The entire team and equipment could be carried by two greyhound type buses. To make that same trip, a single bus would use approximately 63 gallons of fuel, two buses would use 126 gallons of fuel.. A savings of approximately 1400 gallons.. if we really want to save the earths environment. We should eliminate nonessential air flights. At any given moment, there are thousands of commercial passenger jets in the air. A typical Jet carries around 60,000 gallons of fuel.. A typical commercial airliner will burn 36,000 gallons of fuel every 10 hours.. to make those planes pay for themselves, their airlines have to keep those planes in the air 20 hours a day.. that’s over 70,000 gallons of fuel used by a typical airliner every day..Do some math, 1000 claims burns 70,000,000 gallons of fuel every day. That amount of fuel requires 11,700 gasoline tank trucks to transport. And that’s just considering how much fuel just 1000 planes use. There are 5000 planes in the air at every moment of the day 24 hours a day just over the United States… that comes out to 350,000,000 gallons of jet fuel being burned just over the United States every single day.. are all those trips to Disneyland and to visit Florida and the Grand Canyon really that important? If people would take the train or the bus or even drive, that would really save the amount of carbon being dumped into the atmosphere every single day.. keep this in mind. 80% of the population of the United States has never been on a plane. All that fuel is being burned by less than 20% of the population..80% of the country population is getting along without flying
A car maybe more economical but a car can't get to 35,000 ft, doesn't give you the experience an aircraft can and can't fly across as ocean.... argument over, job done!!
Look at it this way. An average car engine produces about 150 horsepower. Just one of the two engines on a Boeing 777 produces 110,000 horsepower (no, that's not a typo). It burns about 3 tons of fuel an hour. A long flight can be 15 hours duration. That's why they need so much fuel.
One fact that was missed from this particular video... jet fuel is not taxed like petrol or diesel in your car. If it was, then the airplane would lose the battle. It only wins because the airline industry has friends in high places (no pun intended).
You have a point regarding taxes.
Airlines usually also have other major tax advantages too... Like say your Irish Aircraft Lessor..
on the other hand those taxes are for maintaining the road so it makes no sense to charge them just like offroad fuel is also untaxed, unless we start charging carbon taxes
@@misham6547 only about ten percent of the taxes on fuel are used to maintain the roads in the UK!
@@DanSmithBK in the UK
0:23
The best a380 livery I have seen so far
HAHA
Lol
But I think thats the worst one
@@tinuvarun5806 "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder"
Simple flying A380 livery looks good 😉😉😉😉
Hardly any 747s carried 500 passengers over a 5 hour flight. Most carried 350 to 380 passengers.
They used 500, to simplify the math, these are journalists not engineers.
I flew on a 747(-400) with around 400 seats, standard for the airline
@@spongebubatz ... This is why the 747 is being replaced by the 777-9 which can seat 426 people.
79% of people that haven't subscribed, but a lot of the channels I watch have less than 5% subscribed, so you're doing better than most 😁 yes, I'm subscribed 😉
The 777 is more fuel efficient than the 747 and the belly cargo is the equivalent of a fully loaded 18 wheeler.
Not an insignificant amount.
The a380 looks *gorgeous* awesome job 👌
I commuted to work for years and the pilot of the 737 told us it took 7 gallons per person in a full plane to take us 631 miles. When you think about that and it only took 1 hr and 40 minutes it is pretty amazing.
Meh, not really.. With a sufficiently designed boat, you could probably take a similar mass than the said 737 a similar distance on the sea with a similar amount of fuel as per person. Of course it would take a week or thee, but..
@@rkan2 you can’t get a boat there most of the year as it is frozen. The distance by water is way over 1000 miles to get there.
@@Chris_at_Home Ever heard of icebreakers? Should work fine for most seasonal ice.
Remember a 777-300 ER is more fuel efficient then 4 people in a Honda Civic ( University Study )
Same true of all modern aircraft.
High power to weight and bypass ratio.
3 minutes late man i actually was thinking about this 3 days ago tnx for this vid 👍
Really curious how much fuel something like a 777-300 ER would need for a 13 hr flight to qatar or tokyo.
About 110,000 litres are enough, considering no hard turbulence on its journey .
That's great
Nice
Fuel questions are always a topic people are interested in. Have to say I am one of them as well. Thanks!
Thanks for the feedback! - TB
I subscribed.
Thank you for pointing out the economics of air travel.
What we tend to overlook is the incredible speeds that these machines are capable of while delivering a low passenger seat mpg.
As we know, speed costs $$
Great blog keep up the good work
Thanks for the feedback! - JS
Outstanding!!!
Well, I don't think comparing the fuel consumption of an almost fully loaded airplane on a long distance flight with the consumption of a car that has just one person in it. You'll have to put 4 people in the car (which normally would take up to 5 people) in order to have a fair comparison - or take 3 people for the car and 400 people for the plane - that'll be more realistic anyway.
Miles, gallon?
What is it?
The majority of the people use liters and km, or in the aviation nautical mile
atr 72-600 drinks about 242 gal/hr, much less than turbo fans.
INTERESTING! I wonder(somebody's already figured it) in comparison, how much fuel the first B 707s and DC-8s burned per hour?? Thanks..
707-300 is about 7.2 tonnes an hour and the DC-8 about 8 tonnes
@@harrybarodawala3588 Thanks, I appreciate your response!
I actually think a lot about fuel burn. If you think about it, 1 gallon per second isn't a lot. You figure you're going a mile each 6 seconds, so that's only six gallons per mile, carrying hundreds of people. As a fun aside, you can measure the speed pretty well when flying over the central US where the roads are a mile apart. It will be a little under 6 seconds between when each road passes under the edge of the wing.
But then again... 6 gallons per mile would allow for with mpg you could run ~355 Toyota Priuses (59mpg/0.166mpg) the same distance. With electric vehicles that number would also be around twice as high if ee consider the MPGe. Also 355 priuses would weigh around 500 tons, though also considerably more if you were to carry 4 passengers in each.
Awesome and Nice video 👍☺️
Thanks for the feedback! - JS
Types of normal fuel load:
Trip fuel, diversion fuel, reserve fuel, contingency fuel, taxi fuel and some additional fuel
Air Canada Flight 143:
What trip fuel?
The world is metric. I've subscribed this very interesting channel, but will unsubscribe, if finally you don't learn, that the metric system is world standard. It is for fueling a plane, as it is for all kinds of scientists. Even in the USA, Australia and the UK, although still not used in public. Not using metric lead to crashed Mars probes and sailing passenger planes without fuel. Use terms, that are used worldwide within the industry, fuel is liters, weight is kilograms, distances are nautical miles. If someone is here for indepth information about airplane industry, he'll know the terms and can work with that.
Although I like the simple flying A 380 very much. Keep on with your excellent work, but keep industry terms, not those from the grocery store.
The aviation standard is the imperial system in all certified aircraft manufacturers like Boeing or Airbus
Where do they put the fuel? How do they manage “Sloshing” movement of large amounts of fuel. How long does it take to file a plane… how much fuel comes out of those hoses compared to a fire hose or other high pressure hoses..? So many questions…
Fuel is stored in the wings and centre fuselage tanks. Some large aircraft even store fuel in the tail. Tanks are often design with bulkhead webs or baffles to reduce sloshing. Some even use foam I believe. Fueling times vary depending on the amounts, among already onboard, number of hoses, type of aircraft etc. Fuelling hoses generally operate at approximately 50 psi if my memory serves me right. Note: I was a fuel tank repair mechanic for a number of years.
Hi, maintenance technician here. We have an *old* refueling trailer at work when our 737 come and go. Ours is rated for 600L per minute, I'm guessing newer ones may push more than that.
Takes about half an hour to fill our 737-400 to the brim.
And as the other commenter said, there are baffles in the tanks to reduce sloshing. Every couple of baffles, one is completely watertight in one way with valves to let the fuel flow inboard but not outboard.
I heard it consume on the average 3 galon / minute fly but that could be equal to fighter jet
35x1800 roughly is 63k if you drove only highway with no stopping at all
Modern jet engines only use 22 percent of there power when at there cruising altitudes where there is less air density which means less drag for them, in fact at take off a jet engine needs to use full power, 100 percent engine power available to it because of the air drag.
What about short flights with small private jets?
Or any large pleasure vehicle. Hate seeing someone in some huge 4x4 vehicle, truck is one thing but you don't need no hummer. Or the 100k pickup just to drive to your office job.
Well it does depend on the distance so
You got it wrong at 3:14 about fuel consumption. Its not $25000 for fuel... Its over $250,000 on fuel. big diff.
One question, how can a flight from London to NY be 25.000$?
They need around 50 tons of fuel, and unfortunately the price per kg is not 0,5$
The answer is "they spent a lot of fuel but its cheap "shortly.
Actually airplane turbine doesn't consume fuel when reached 40,000 feet and it's 500 mph research.
Why are you using a 747-400, an aircraft that has been retired by almost all airlines? I know it is the extreme example, but it would have been better to compare an efficient 787 with other fleets.
Remember you got to get to the airport Add the fuel for the total trip
How am I so early
DOPE!
Do airliners use Fuel System Icing Inhibitor (FSII)?
Depending upon the aircraft Type, the fan-jet, turbo-prop, pure turbo jet, reportedly consume more petro based fuel per person (passenger) than competitive forms of transport. The trade-off is speed/time. Please consult the various websites that report estimations of fuel-burn and related yields of pollutants that are emitted by aircraft. Keep in mind that over 10,000 aircraft are said to be airborn at any one time around be this planet.
If you live under a flight path, you're already polluted, same as living nearby to any major autoroute.
We inhale minute particles of spent petroleum fuels, automobile cast-offs such as brake pad and fanbelt residue, and everything else that can be expended for the sake of producing and converting heat energy into kinetic motion.
That is the basic reason why life as we know it on planet Earth is imperiled.
Where putting this amount of fuel?
When u realize that full tank of fuel in your car one aircraft burns in about 60 seconds. That's insane
Even more insane when u realise that planes store enough fuel to fill about 1500 bathtubs…
Contract luggage carrier separate save time and fuels
What about millitary planes?
1:10 can you please include the metric system as well? about 95% of the world, can't imagine half a million miles without a caculator
We're working on it. Unfortunately, it'll take time to trickle through to our videos. - TB
It is about 804 672 KM
Quite short i was looking for something more detailed
@0:52 the calculation of Conversion of 18000 Gals is Wrong, it should be 18000 x 3. 79= 68,220. But you guys have written 68.137 L which is too small compared to the 18000 even.
Where is the 1,800 gallons stored??
Talking about KLM... They are so focused on cutting back carbon emission, that they extended the gas-guzzling 747s for as long as possible...
(even if they could have easily replaced them years ago for more environmental-friendly airplanes)
Replacing planes uses a lot of Carbon in the manufacturing of a new plane, so extending the life of an older plane by a few years can make sense.
Hey I’m not complaining
@@MarcusNesbitt4 That is a great excuse! KLM should fly the old Air France A380s. Like that, no new 777x need to be produced... (Would you really believe such a marketing scam?)
@@MarcusNesbitt4 Same applies to cars. 40% of carbon emmissions over the lifetime of the average car is taken up manufacturing all of the components and materials and final assembly. Not sure what the ratio is for aircraft, probably less, but your point is valid.
None! It's a hoax
LMAo sure honey.
La ilaha illAllah.
When does he get to the point?
Where does all that fuel fit? LOL
7
I now support air travel
Before we go any further, please do us a favour & STOP NAGGING PEOPLE TO SUBSCRIBE! It really means a lot...
Hi I’m first viewer
8 views 9 likes ??
Do u thing the big planes will ever come back?
Not with current birth rates below replacement, we won't that kind of density on an aircraft.
Airbus A380 Carries 127 Tonns of fuel in each wing Plus the weight of 2 Jets engines and all the hydraulics 😂😂😂😂😂
Most people will never question that!!
Most never question anything just sheep following the flock 🐑🐑🐑
@@briandicks3805 Who is the sheep? I would say it is you. I've worked on many large aircraft. I have been inside the wing, I have fueled them. What is your experience with aircraft?
This is silly! The comparison must be based on trip, not vehicle. To fly from NYC to London on the most efficient planes available ( 787 & A350 ) with all seats occupied burns about 40-45 gallons of fuel per seat. That’s not terrible, until you think how long it takes the average driver to use 40-45 gallons of fuel. Frequent and or long-distance flying is about the most environmentally damaging thing you can do as an individual, far worse than driving. The real issue is whether the trip should be made at all. I am not a green zealot - I love to fly and I do fly.
Does 18,000 gallons of jet fuel really cost only $25,000, sounds kind of low to me?
No tax on it.
If your car is carrying one person then you should compare the plane with one person. I take 5 people in my car, so leave me alone, the best I ever got was 80 to the gallon.
What’s with the 79% of you who haven’t yet subscribed?
No electric plane?
feet, gallons, miles and pounds ? it's not like it's way more convenient to use metric measurements right 🥴 ?
According to a UA-cam channel planes only need fuel to get them in the air; then once buoyant they only require air to keep the turbines turning. *Don't kill the messenger*
It seems pretty convincing to me. 😐 _Watch the channel first before you opinionate in the commentary please._
A typical passenger commercial jet gets .2 miles per gallon or, 5 gallons per mile.
A greyhound bus gets 6 miles per gallon
To fly the New York Jets football team from New York to Pittsburgh takes approximately 1400 to 1600 gallons of jet fuel.. that does not take into consideration the amount of fuel used while in a holding position, waiting
The entire team and equipment could be carried by two greyhound type buses. To make that same trip, a single bus would use approximately 63 gallons of fuel, two buses would use 126 gallons of fuel.. A savings of approximately 1400 gallons..
if we really want to save the earths environment. We should eliminate nonessential air flights. At any given moment, there are thousands of commercial passenger jets in the air. A typical Jet carries around 60,000 gallons of fuel.. A typical commercial airliner will burn 36,000 gallons of fuel every 10 hours.. to make those planes pay for themselves, their airlines have to keep those planes in the air 20 hours a day.. that’s over 70,000 gallons of fuel used by a typical airliner every day..Do some math, 1000 claims burns 70,000,000 gallons of fuel every day. That amount of fuel requires 11,700 gasoline tank trucks to transport. And that’s just considering how much fuel just 1000 planes use. There are 5000 planes in the air at every moment of the day 24 hours a day just over the United States… that comes out to 350,000,000 gallons of jet fuel being burned just over the United States every single day..
are all those trips to Disneyland and to visit Florida and the Grand Canyon really that important? If people would take the train or the bus or even drive, that would really save the amount of carbon being dumped into the atmosphere every single day..
keep this in mind. 80% of the population of the United States has never been on a plane. All that fuel is being burned by less than 20% of the population..80% of the country population is getting along without flying
A car maybe more economical but a car can't get to 35,000 ft, doesn't give you the experience an aircraft can and can't fly across as ocean.... argument over, job done!!
Liars
Huh? Oh right, only compressed air, right? Poor you gullible fools...
Ok Tesla. How about some electric airplanes? 😂
F*** affordable but a what price? So polluting
fill it up on a scale.
That’s why there’s fuel capacitance probes.
0:03 haha, most of us take this granted because there are people more better qualified to look after it called pilots 😂
you neads to tell
this to grean peas lol
Seems strange to have fuel in the tail,wings .Sthing doesn't sound right.
Planes carry so much fuel 🤔
Look at it this way. An average car engine produces about 150 horsepower. Just one of the two engines on a Boeing 777 produces 110,000 horsepower (no, that's not a typo). It burns about 3 tons of fuel an hour. A long flight can be 15 hours duration. That's why they need so much fuel.
Aircraft wings are EXTREMELY big. You can't really tell from the inside of a plane
they run on compressed air though 🤡
I can only just immagine Greta Thumberg watching this video 💀
If you'd like to be depressed, every pound of fuel turns into about three pounds of CO2 when burned.
Trees need to breath too!
@@coldforgedcowboy They have too much to breath, and unfortunately can't keep up.
Better turn off the electricity to your house and walk to wherever you want to go and plant your own food
@@Cartoonman154 yes.
We need to fix that.
@@TheLostfoundation yeah, I'm sure that'll fix it.
You know what else uses 1 gallon per second my crappy American made car
This is false information
1st
Noo! You just beat me lol
For once you actually are
Want the truth
And?🤷🏻♂️
Most people can't handle the truth!
This is bs how you can put 200tons of fuel in 747 into wings 🤣🤣
This propaganda for the gullible 🤣
They got no need to use fosil fuels now they have Alien E.T power technologies
The answer is "they spent a lot of fuel but its cheap "shortly.