Fuel flow B737 / Tornado / Harrier ?
Thread Starter
Fuel flow B737 / Tornado / Harrier ?
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!
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!
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: The best part of Somerset
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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
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
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: uk
Posts: 1,266
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tornado at 80% Rpm circa 120 kgs/min {i.e. approx 420 kts}
More like 92%ish and 60-65 kg/min in training fits for 420kt at LL. 35-40 kg at .7M ML
Thread Starter
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…! )
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…! )
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?)
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?)
Fuel flow
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
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
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: England
Posts: 488
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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...
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!
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!
Short Blunt Shock
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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
Strangely, the J doesn't do much better in the cruise at similar levels - or so I was recently told...
16B
Red On, Green On
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Between the woods and the water
Age: 24
Posts: 6,487
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
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.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: sunny south
Age: 52
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: NOTTINGHAM
Posts: 758
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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!
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!
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 482
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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
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
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: The best part of Somerset
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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??????
