My fellow ppruners -----

Could someone please help me with a question that was recently brought to me? (Unfortunately I don't have the relevent manuals at hand...)

What is the typical fuel flow...
... for a B737
... for a Tornado
... for a Harrier
(no matter which models or engines)

... in cruise
... during take-off?

Your support is deeply appreciated!

Dont know about the 737 but:

Tornado in Reheat at LL circa 900 kgs/min
Tornado at 80% Rpm circa 120 kgs/min {i.e. approx 420 kts}

Harrier in Hover circa 250 lbs/min
Harrier at ~80% RPM circa 100 lbs/min {i.e. approx 420 kts}

Moe

Top of head figures for B737

Takeoff - 3000 kg/hr per engine
Cruise (at FL 3XX) 1100 kg/hr per engine.

For the 737 in particular, compared to the Tonka/Harrier, there really is a massive difference in fuel flows with aircraft weight, particularly for cruise. The above figures might be for typical TO weights for a '300.

Naturally OAT/altitude and amount of T-O thrust required play a huge role as well. If you're doing a PC simor something the above figures should be closeto what you need.

All I can say is that I once owned a C-172 that I put on the line (Noooooooooooooooo!) apparently that burned 11 gph

A GR4 would have to be in a descent with a fuel leak to achieve those figures.

More like 92%ish and 60-65 kg/min in training fits for 420kt at LL. 35-40 kg at .7M ML

Thanks for your support, folks!

So let’s quickly summarize what we know, and think metric:

Moe Syzlak’s Tornado in Reheat at LL circa 900 kgs/min
Tornado at 80% Rpm circa 120 kgs/min {i.e. approx 420 kts}

Moe Syzlak’s Harrier in Hover circa 250 lbs/min = ca. 113 kgs/min
Harrier at ~80% RPM circa 100 lbs/min {i.e. approx 420 kts} = ca. 45 kgs/min

Gary Lager’s B737-300:
Takeoff - 3000 kg/hr per engine = total 100 kgs/min
Cruise (at FL 3XX) 1100 kg/hr per engine = total 36 kgs/min

Silberfuch’s Shuttle
200.000 kgs/min

Onan’s C-172 11 gph = ca. 42 l/h = ca. 0,69 l/min = ca. 0,55 kgs/min

And flugholm’s B-Falke:
Cruise ca. 11 l/h = 0,18 l/min = ca. 0,22 kgs/min at a whopping 60 knots
Takeoff – not that much more fuel flow, but much more noise. (Now, don’t get me started on that…! )

Griz, fair cop, its been a while since I wore an LSJ with sleeves!

Fascinating stuff, folks! Especially Griz' revelation of the frugality of the GR4.

Now how about equivalent figures for a Jag 3A (104 and 106), a Hawk and a Nimrod - (with the latter including the comparative fuel saving to be gleaned by shutting two engines down on patrol?)

Jag at ML about 35-40 kg/min. As low as the high twenties if light, clean and high. By high, I again mean about the high twenties (thirties if we're feeling really brave!)
At low level, typically 60 kg/min when heavy and about 50 kg/min when a little lighter. Full burner at low level anything up to 300 kg/min.
For the 104 add about 5%, at a guess, but we don't use them any more.
I'm pretty sure none of this is secret!
BV

Typical figures for planning AAR conducted at around FL200 at 300kt IAS= .64M.

Fast jets average about 35-40 kg/min.

Aircraft with reheat can double that whilst attempting/holding contact.

The FJs can improve economy by climbing to around FL250 and accelerating to about M0.8.

The tankers burn about 7500 kg/hr during AAR (125kg/min) but can reduce to nearer 6000kg/hr by climbing to apprx FL350.

Unfortunately, the "economy" regimes are incompatible with AAR.

Cue BEagle and the A330 / A310 figures...

LL cruise figures for the harrier might be a bit optimistic. Rule of the planning figures were about 7 mins per 1000lb in just tanks fit and 6 mins/1000lb with tanks/cbls/aquis etc. This works out to 65kg/min and 75 kg/min or thereabous.

Rough average figures for fuel burn at AAR heights and speeds with hoses out are 90 kg/min for the A310MRTT and 100 kg/min for the A330MRTT. But those are very prudent figures as on the 2 A310 trips I did last year, the average was nearer 80 kg/min - although the aircraft was nowhere near MTOW on departure and the trips were only 3 to 3.5 hours in length.

Whereas for the VC10 the figure is 125 kg/min!

Can't remember the figure, but a Gnat cruising at high level used tiny amounts of fuel per mile as it had a turbojet, not a turbofan, and an efficient swept wing. Contrast that, if you will, with the Jet Provost T 5 when we started thrashing them along at 300 knots and 250 ft. It had a thirst like Oliver Read - the only thing moving faster than the fuel gauges was the 'g' meter in even the slightest turbulence!

Albert (K) burns about 2200 Kg/Hr in the cruise (FL240-ish, M0.55), and about 3000 Kg/Hr balls out at LL.

Strangely, the J doesn't do much better in the cruise at similar levels - or so I was recently told...

16B

Moe

Your Harrier numbers are none that I would recognise. I suppose it all depends on your definition of circa.

JF

HMS Sabre (fast training boat, 108', simulated the Russian fast attack boats at FOST, Portland in the 70s) had twin Avon gas turbines. At 50 kts she was consuming a gallon a minute.

Moe,

Your Tornado in reheat number is not one that I would recognise - even taking into account 'circa'....

Sm

Been a couple of years since i left the kipper fleet but on average the mighty rod used to burn about 7000-8000lbs/hr on four getting down to about 5000-6000lbs/hr on two however at low level throwing it around in the seaweed it went up quite a bit. i'm sure someone will correct me on these figures but it has been a while.

Just to get a Bucc into the debate (with UWT & ECM etc but no matter what else you were carrying, thanks to the bomb bay)

420 kts @LL = 100 lb/min
500 kts @LL = 120 lb/min (never got much higher no matter the speed) Max chat at SL = 580 kts (no burner!!)
HL cruise .85M = 60lb/min

IIRRC

God Bless the one that's going to fly in the UK and those who will fly it!

Cant just have you fixed wing guys dominating this thread so fuel figures for the Puma

LL max chat - 580kgs/hr
FL80 - 400kgs/hr
Hover MAUW- 600kgs/hr

Planing figures is 10kgs/min for normal SH stuff, 8kgs for IF flying. All these figures are in a temperate climate

Doesnt give a long time between refuels, means less time between toilet stops though

OK. OK. Lets call it 225lbs/min in the hover in hottish wx. While we're splitting hairs, JF, why don't you explain the placement of the fuel flow gauge in the FRS1??????