![\"\"](\"http:\/\/remote-support.space\/wordpress\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/fuel.webp\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
Duration<\/strong>: ~<\/span>1\u20132 minutes from brake release to 1,500 ft<\/p>\n<\/li>\n Fuel Burn<\/strong>: Approx. 12,000\u201315,000 liters per hour per engine<\/strong> at full takeoff thrust Actual consumption<\/strong>: \ud83d\udca1 Engines operate at or near <\/em>maximum thrust<\/em><\/strong> (100% N1), especially on hot or high-altitude runways.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n Duration<\/strong>: ~<\/span>15\u201325 minutes<\/p>\n<\/li>\n Fuel Burn<\/strong>: Starts high (~<\/span>40,000 L\/h total) and decreases as the aircraft climbs and throttles back<\/p>\n<\/li>\n Average consumption<\/strong>: ~<\/span>8,000\u201310,000 kg<\/strong> (\u2248 10,000\u201312,500 liters<\/strong>) total for the climb phase<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n \u2708\ufe0f The aircraft is heaviest at this point (full fuel load), so climb is fuel-intensive\u2014but necessary to reach efficient cruise altitude.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n Duration<\/strong>: ~<\/span>7\u201310 hours on a long-haul flight<\/p>\n<\/li>\n Fuel Burn<\/strong>:<\/p>\n Per engine<\/strong>: ~<\/span>2,400\u20132,800 kg\/hour (~<\/span>3,000\u20133,500 liters\/hour)<\/p>\n<\/li>\n Total for 4 engines<\/strong>: ~<\/span>9,600\u201311,200 kg\/hour<\/strong> \u2192 \u224812,000\u201314,000 liters\/hour<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n Per second<\/strong>: ~<\/span>3.3\u20133.9 liters\/second (often rounded to ~<\/span>4 L\/s<\/strong> in general estimates)<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n \u2705 This is the <\/em>most fuel-efficient phase<\/em><\/strong>\u2014thin air reduces drag, and engines run at optimal cruise thrust (~<\/span>70\u201385% power). As fuel burns off, the aircraft gets lighter and slightly more efficient over time.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n Duration<\/strong>: ~<\/span>20\u201330 minutes<\/p>\n<\/li>\n Fuel Burn<\/strong>: Engines often at idle or near-idle thrust<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/li>\n Consumption<\/strong>: ~<\/span>500\u20131,000 liters total<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n \ud83d\udeec Modern descents use \u201ccontinuous descent approaches\u201d (CDA) to minimize thrust and save fuel\u2014essentially gliding with minimal engine power.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n Pre-flight taxi<\/strong>: 10\u201330 minutes, using 2 or 4 engines<\/p>\n<\/li>\n Fuel Burn<\/strong>:<\/p>\n Per engine at idle<\/strong>: ~<\/span>200\u2013300 kg\/hour (~<\/span>250\u2013375 L\/hour)<\/p>\n<\/li>\n Total (4 engines)<\/strong>: ~<\/span>1,000\u20131,500 L\/hour<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n Typical taxi fuel<\/strong>: ~<\/span>500\u20131,500 liters<\/strong> (depending on airport congestion)<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n \ud83d\udd0c Many airlines now use <\/em>single-engine taxiing<\/em><\/strong> or <\/em>electric tugs<\/em><\/strong> to reduce this consumption.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n \u2705 This aligns closely with the commonly cited 144,000 liters<\/strong> for a 10-hour 747 flight.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n Cruise dominates total fuel use<\/strong> (~<\/span>85\u201390% of total).<\/p>\n<\/li>\n Takeoff and climb are intense but brief<\/strong>\u2014high thrust, high burn rate.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n Modern flight planning<\/strong> (optimized climb profiles, reduced taxi times, efficient routing) helps minimize waste.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n Newer aircraft like the 777X or A350<\/strong> use 20\u201330% less fuel<\/strong> than the 747-400 for similar payloads, thanks to advanced materials, engines, and aerodynamics.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n As the industry pushes toward sustainability, understanding these phases helps target efficiency gains\u2014like electric taxi systems<\/strong>, SAFs during high-thrust phases<\/strong>, and AI-optimized climb\/cruise profiles<\/strong>.<\/p>\n \n <\/p>\n That\u2019s an excellent and nuanced question! Comparing total ticket price<\/strong> and fuel efficiency per passenger-mile<\/strong> across such a diverse set of aircraft\u2014from regional turboprops like the ATR to widebody giants like the A380 and even small general aviation planes like the Cessna 172\u2014requires understanding how aircraft size, range, operational economics, and market role<\/strong> differ dramatically.<\/p>\n Below is a comparative overview<\/strong> based on real-world data (as of 2024\u20132025), focusing on:<\/p>\n Fuel consumption per passenger per mile<\/strong> (or per km)<\/p>\n<\/li>\n Typical ticket price ranges<\/strong> (economy class, one-way, adjusted for route type)<\/p>\n<\/li>\n Operational scope<\/strong>: short-haul vs. ultra-long-haul<\/p>\n<\/li>\n Key assumptions<\/strong> for fair comparison<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n Fuel efficiency<\/strong> is expressed in liters per 100 passenger-kilometers (L\/100 pax-km)<\/strong> \u2014 lower = better.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n CO\u2082 equivalent<\/strong>: Jet fuel \u2248 2.5 kg CO\u2082 per liter.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n Load factor<\/strong>: Assumed 80\u201385%<\/strong> for airliners, 100%<\/strong> for small planes (1\u20134 pax).<\/p>\n<\/li>\n Ticket prices<\/strong>: Based on typical economy fares<\/strong> (not budget sale fares), averaged across major routes.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n “Short hop”<\/strong>: ~<\/span>500 km (e.g., London\u2013Paris)<\/p>\n<\/li>\n “Longest hop”<\/strong>: Max practical range with typical payload (not ferry range).<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
\n\u2192 Total: ~<\/span>48,000\u201360,000 liters\/hour<\/strong> for all 4 engines<\/p>\n<\/li>\n
\nSince takeoff lasts only ~<\/span>2\u20133 minutes<\/strong>, total fuel used is ~<\/span>1,600\u20133,000 liters<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n
\n\u26f0\ufe0f 2. Climb (to Cruise Altitude, e.g., 35,000 ft)<\/strong><\/h3>\n
\n
\n
\n\u2601\ufe0f 3. Cruise (Most of the Flight)<\/strong><\/h3>\n
\n
\n
\n
\n\ud83d\udcc9 4. Descent & Approach<\/strong><\/h3>\n
\n
\n
\n\ud83d\ude97 5. Taxiing (Pre-takeoff & Post-landing)<\/strong><\/h3>\n
\n
\n
\n
\n\ud83d\udcca Total Fuel Use: Example \u2013 10-Hour Flight (e.g., LAX to LHR)<\/strong><\/h3>\n
\n\n\n
\n Phase<\/th>\n Fuel Consumed (approx.)<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n \n Taxi out<\/td>\n 800 L<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n Takeoff<\/td>\n 2,500 L<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n Climb<\/td>\n 11,000 L<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n Cruise (9 hrs)<\/td>\n 126,000 L<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n Descent<\/td>\n 800 L<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n Taxi in<\/td>\n 600 L<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n Total<\/strong><\/td>\n ~<\/span>141,700 liters<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<\/div>\n \n
\nKey Takeaways:<\/h3>\n
\n
\n\n
\n\ud83d\udccc Key Assumptions & Notes<\/h3>\n
\n
\n\u2708\ufe0f Aircraft Comparison Table<\/h2>\n
\n\n\n
\n Aircraft<\/th>\n Typical Seats<\/th>\n Short-Hop Fuel Use (L\/100 pax-km)<\/th>\n Long-Hop Fuel Use (L\/100 pax-km)<\/th>\n Short-Hop Ticket*<\/span><\/th>\n Long-Hop Ticket*<\/span><\/th>\n Max Range (km)<\/th>\n Role<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n \n Airbus A380<\/strong><\/td>\n 500\u2013600<\/td>\n 3.8<\/td>\n 2.9<\/strong><\/td>\n $120\u2013$200<\/td>\n $800\u2013$1,800<\/td>\n 15,000<\/td>\n Ultra-long-haul flagship<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n Boeing 747-8<\/strong><\/td>\n 410\u2013460<\/td>\n 4.0<\/td>\n 3.0<\/strong><\/td>\n $130\u2013$220<\/td>\n $850\u2013$1,900<\/td>\n 14,800<\/td>\n Long-haul legacy<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n Boeing 787-9<\/strong><\/td>\n 290<\/td>\n 3.6<\/td>\n 2.7<\/strong><\/td>\n $110\u2013$190<\/td>\n $700\u2013$1,600<\/td>\n 14,140<\/td>\n Efficient long-haul<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n Airbus A350-900<\/strong><\/td>\n 325<\/td>\n 3.5<\/td>\n 2.6<\/strong><\/td>\n $110\u2013$185<\/td>\n $700\u2013$1,500<\/td>\n 15,000<\/td>\n Modern long-haul<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n Boeing 737 MAX 8<\/strong><\/td>\n 170<\/td>\n 3.2<\/strong><\/td>\n \u2014<\/td>\n $60\u2013$140<\/td>\n \u2014<\/td>\n 3,850<\/td>\n Short\/medium-haul<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n Airbus A320neo<\/strong><\/td>\n 165<\/td>\n 3.1<\/strong><\/td>\n \u2014<\/td>\n $55\u2013$130<\/td>\n \u2014<\/td>\n 3,500<\/td>\n Short\/medium-haul<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n ATR 72-600<\/strong><\/td>\n 72<\/td>\n 4.5<\/strong><\/td>\n \u2014<\/td>\n $40\u2013$100<\/td>\n \u2014<\/td>\n 1,525<\/td>\n Regional turboprop<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n de Havilland Canada DHC-2 Beaver<\/strong><\/td>\n 6\u20137<\/td>\n