Fuel Use of different airplanes.

---

🛫 1. Takeoff (Takeoff Roll + Initial Climb)

• Duration: ~1–2 minutes from brake release to 1,500 ft

• Fuel Burn: Approx. 12,000–15,000 liters per hour per engine at full takeoff thrust
  → Total: ~48,000–60,000 liters/hour for all 4 engines

• Actual consumption:
  Since takeoff lasts only ~2–3 minutes, total fuel used is ~1,600–3,000 liters

💡 Engines operate at or near maximum thrust (100% N1), especially on hot or high-altitude runways.

---

⛰️ 2. Climb (to Cruise Altitude, e.g., 35,000 ft)

• Duration: ~15–25 minutes

• Fuel Burn: Starts high (~40,000 L/h total) and decreases as the aircraft climbs and throttles back

• Average consumption: ~8,000–10,000 kg (≈ 10,000–12,500 liters) total for the climb phase

✈️ The aircraft is heaviest at this point (full fuel load), so climb is fuel-intensive—but necessary to reach efficient cruise altitude.

---

☁️ 3. Cruise (Most of the Flight)

• Duration: ~7–10 hours on a long-haul flight

• Fuel Burn:

  • Per engine: ~2,400–2,800 kg/hour (~3,000–3,500 liters/hour)

  • Total for 4 engines: ~9,600–11,200 kg/hour → ≈12,000–14,000 liters/hour

• Per second: ~3.3–3.9 liters/second (often rounded to ~4 L/s in general estimates)

✅ This is the most fuel-efficient phase—thin air reduces drag, and engines run at optimal cruise thrust (~70–85% power). As fuel burns off, the aircraft gets lighter and slightly more efficient over time.

---

📉 4. Descent & Approach

• Duration: ~20–30 minutes

• Fuel Burn: Engines often at idle or near-idle thrust

• Consumption: ~500–1,000 liters total

🛬 Modern descents use “continuous descent approaches” (CDA) to minimize thrust and save fuel—essentially gliding with minimal engine power.

---

🚗 5. Taxiing (Pre-takeoff & Post-landing)

• Pre-flight taxi: 10–30 minutes, using 2 or 4 engines

• Fuel Burn:

  • Per engine at idle: ~200–300 kg/hour (~250–375 L/hour)

  • Total (4 engines): ~1,000–1,500 L/hour

• Typical taxi fuel: ~500–1,500 liters (depending on airport congestion)

🔌 Many airlines now use single-engine taxiing or electric tugs to reduce this consumption.

---

📊 Total Fuel Use: Example – 10-Hour Flight (e.g., LAX to LHR)

✅ This aligns closely with the commonly cited 144,000 liters for a 10-hour 747 flight.

---

Key Takeaways:

• Cruise dominates total fuel use (~85–90% of total).

• Takeoff and climb are intense but brief—high thrust, high burn rate.

• Modern flight planning (optimized climb profiles, reduced taxi times, efficient routing) helps minimize waste.

• Newer aircraft like the 777X or A350 use 20–30% less fuel than the 747-400 for similar payloads, thanks to advanced materials, engines, and aerodynamics.

As the industry pushes toward sustainability, understanding these phases helps target efficiency gains—like electric taxi systems, SAFs during high-thrust phases, and AI-optimized climb/cruise profiles.

---

 

That’s an excellent and nuanced question! Comparing total ticket price and fuel efficiency per passenger-mile across such a diverse set of aircraft—from regional turboprops like the ATR to widebody giants like the A380 and even small general aviation planes like the Cessna 172—requires understanding how aircraft size, range, operational economics, and market role differ dramatically.

Below is a comparative overview based on real-world data (as of 2024–2025), focusing on:

1. Fuel consumption per passenger per mile (or per km)

2. Typical ticket price ranges (economy class, one-way, adjusted for route type)

3. Operational scope: short-haul vs. ultra-long-haul

4. Key assumptions for fair comparison

---

📌 Key Assumptions & Notes

• Fuel efficiency is expressed in liters per 100 passenger-kilometers (L/100 pax-km) — lower = better.

• CO₂ equivalent: Jet fuel ≈ 2.5 kg CO₂ per liter.

• Load factor: Assumed 80–85% for airliners, 100% for small planes (1–4 pax).

• Ticket prices: Based on typical economy fares (not budget sale fares), averaged across major routes.

• “Short hop”: ~500 km (e.g., London–Paris)

• “Longest hop”: Max practical range with typical payload (not ferry range).

---

✈️ Aircraft Comparison Table

* Ticket prices are one-way economy for comparable routes (e.g., short: JFK–BOS; long: LAX–SYD). Small aircraft prices reflect per-seat charter costs, not scheduled service.

---

🔍 Detailed Insights

✅ Most Fuel-Efficient (Long-Haul)

• Boeing 787 & Airbus A350: ~2.6–2.7 L/100 pax-km
  → Thanks to carbon-fiber airframes, high-bypass GEnx/Trent XWB engines, and optimized aerodynamics.

• A380: Surprisingly efficient at full load (~2.9 L/100 pax-km) due to high passenger density—but inefficient if underfilled.

✅ Most Efficient (Short-Haul)

• A320neo / 737 MAX: ~3.1–3.2 L/100 pax-km
  → New engines (LEAP, PW1100G) cut fuel use by 15–20% vs. older models.

⚠️ Least Efficient (Per Passenger)

• Cessna 172 & Beaver: 25–30 L/100 pax-km
  → Small piston/turboprop engines are not designed for efficiency, but for versatility, STOL, or access. → However, if you charter the whole plane, total fuel cost may still be lower than 4 airline tickets on a remote route.

📉 Why Small Planes Are Inefficient Per Passenger

• No economies of scale

• Lower cruise speeds → more time burning fuel per km

• Older engine tech (avgas or basic turboprops)

---

💰 Ticket Price vs. Efficiency: The Trade-Off

• Airlines price tickets based on demand, competition, and operating cost per seat—not just fuel.

• Example: An A380 flight from Dubai to London may cost $150 because Emirates fills 550 seats and spreads fixed costs.

• A Beaver flight from Vancouver to a remote island might cost $300 per seat—but it’s the only way to get there.

🌍 Environmental Note:
While the A380 uses more total fuel than a 737, it emits less CO₂ per passenger on a full long-haul flight than a half-empty regional jet.

---

📏 Real-World Fuel Use Examples

---

🔮 Future Trends

• Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF): Being tested across all these platforms—especially on 787/A350.

• Hybrid-electric: Likely first on ATR-sized or smaller aircraft (e.g., Heart Aerospace ES-30).

• A380 & 747: Phased out of passenger service (last 747 delivered in 2023); replaced by twin-engine efficiency.

---

Summary: Efficiency vs. Practicality