[PDF] [PDF] Transatlantic airline fuel efficiency ranking, 2017 - International

[PDF] Airbus vs Boeing in Superjumbos: Credibility and Preemption

and launch a 555-seat superjumbo plane known as the A380 aisle jets seating 100-200 passengers to the twin-aisle Boeing 747-400 seating more comparison, the analysts are predicting that Airbus will sell from 515 planes (The Airline

[PDF] 747X vs A380 - deptaoevtedu

22 mar 2001 · 747X vs A380 How to Reduce Airport Congestion? Geoffrey Buescher AOE 4984 Boeing: 740 passenger aircraft 747 size or larger, only 330 characteristics for comparison of what might be allowable in absence of gate

[PDF] Transatlantic airline fuel efficiency ranking, 2017 - International

9 sept 2018 · In 2015, the ICCT compared the fuel efficiency of 20 major airlines operating In contrast, capacity provided by the Boeing 747 dropped from 16 the Airbus A380 on two-thirds of its flights and had the worst fuel efficiency

[PDF] Airbus A380: - HAW Hamburg

The Need for A380 In the early 90s initial market studies identified a need for an aircraft that (in comparison to the Boeing 747 “Jumbo Jet”): Has more capacity

[PDF] the 2 1 stcenturyjetliner - Tobias Baldauf

AIRBUS A380 - the 21st century jetliner - 1 - AIRBUS costs per seat than Boeing 747-400 with at the same time 11 - [3 4] Comparison of giant airplanes  

[PDF] INVESTIGATING THE AIRBUS A380: WAS IT A - Scholars Bank

Figure 2: Shower suite on Emirates A380 26 Figure 3: Full service bar on Qatar A380 26 Figure 4: Airbus A380 vs Boeing 747 comparison chart 27 Figure 5: 

[PDF] Transcript

Compared to a Boeing 747-400, the A380 is five meters taller, nearly four main characteristics of the plane / comparison with the Boeing 747 / passengers'

[PDF] Airbus versus Boeing Revisited: International Competition in the

upon the discounts offered on the A-380), but would reduce the market for The leading aircraft in this category are the Boeing 747, the Boeing 777, and product firm markups and the difference becomes much more pronounced over time

[PDF] boeing 747 vs a380 size

[PDF] boeing 747 vs airbus a380

[PDF] boeing 747 vs airbus a380 size

[PDF] boeing 787

[PDF] boeing 787 case study

[PDF] boeing 787 case study answers

[PDF] boeing 787 case study pdf

[PDF] boeing 787 dreamliner case study answers

[PDF] boeing 787 fuel consumption per hour

[PDF] boeing 787 manufacturing a dream case study analysis

[PDF] boeing 7e7 case study pdf

[PDF] boeing a380 capacity

[PDF] boeing a380 emirates interior

[PDF] boeing a380 for sale

[PDF] boeing a380 fuel capacity

SEPTEMBER 2018WHITE PAPER

Brandon Graver, Ph.D., and Daniel Rutherford, Ph.D. BEIJING | BERLIN | BRUSSELS | SAN FRANCISCO | WASHINGTON The authors thank Tim Johnson, Andrew Murphy, Anastasia Kharina, and Amy Smorodin for their review and support. We also acknowledge Airline Data Inc. for providing processed BTS data, and FlightGlobal for Ascend Fleet data.

International Council on Clean Transportation

1225 I Street NW Suite 900

Washington, DC 20005 USA

communications@theicct.org www.theicct.org @TheICCT © 2018 International Council on Clean Transportation

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

....................................iii 1. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................ 2. METHODOLOGY ........................................................................ 3. RESULTS ........................................................................ 4. CONCLUSIONS AND NEXT STEPS ........................................................................ ..........20 5. REFERENCES ........................................................................

APPENDIX A: MODEL VALIDATION

..............26 APPENDIX B: ADJUSTED 2014 TRANSATLANTIC FUEL EFFICIENCY ............................27

WHITE PAPER

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1.

Table 2.

Table 3.

Table 4.

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure ES-1.

Figure ES-2.

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

Figure 4.

Figure 5.

Figure 6.

Figure 7.

Figure 8.

Figure A-1.

Figure B-1.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

27British Airways

30Lufthansa

31United

33AeroRot

33Alitalia

33Aer Lingus

33Austrian

33American

34Scandinavian

34Delta

34Iberia

34Icelandair

35Virgin Atlantic

35Thomas Cook

35Air France

35Turkish

36KLM

37SWISS

39WOW air

44Norwegian

Excess

Fuel/pax-km

+ 13% - + 19% + 22% + 26% + 26% + 26% + 26% + 29% + 29% + 29% + 29% + 33% + 33% + 33% + 33% + 33% + 42% + 47% + 63%

INDUSTRY AVERAGE

Average Fuel Economy [pax-km/L]

Figure ES-1.

WHITE PAPER

30%39%20%

33%

35%11%15%

17% 0%

10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

20142017

Freight Shar

e

Passenger Load Factor

Seating Densit

y

Aircraft Fuel Burn

Figure ES-2.

WHITE PAPER

1.

INTRODUCTION

2.

METHODOLOGY

2.1

AIRLINE SELECTION

Table 1.

AirlineFlights

performedAverage ight length (km)Share of

ASKsShare of

ATKsMost prevalent

aircraft

Aer Lingus

Aeroot

Air France

Alitalia

American

Austrian

British Airways

Delta

Iberia

Icelandair

KLM

Lufthansa

Norwegian

Scandinavian

continued

WHITE PAPER

AirlineFlights

performedAverage ight length (km)Share of

ASKsShare of

ATKsMost prevalent

aircraft SWISS

Thomas Cook

Turkish

United

Virgin Atlantic

WOW air

Total280,4977,028100%100%Airbus A330-300

Note: ASK = Available seat kilometers. ATK = Available tonne kilometers. Source: Airline Data Inc. (2018)

Table 2.

AircraftMTOM

(tonnes)Typical seating capacityCargo capacity (m 3 )Number of engines, max. thrustRange (km)

Airbus A318

Boeing 737-700

Boeing 737-800

Boeing 737 MAX-8

Airbus A321

Boeing 767-300ER

Boeing 767-400ER

Boeing 787-8

Airbus A330-200

Airbus A330-300

Boeing 787-9

Boeing 757-200

Boeing 757-300

Airbus A340-300

Airbus A350-900

Boeing 777-200ER

Boeing 777-300ER

Airbus A340-600

Boeing 747-400

Boeing 747-8I

Airbus A380-800

Note: MTOM = maximum takeo mass. Sources: Airbus (2017); Airbus (2018); Boeing (1999); Boeing (2008);

Boeing (2010); Boeing (2011); Boeing (n.d.)

2.2

FUEL BURN MODELING

Table 3.

TypeVariableSources

Airline scheduled ights

Airline-specic aircraft

parameters

Aircraft weights

Aircraft fuel burn

Other operational variables

WHITE PAPER

payload kg seats departures load factor pax 100kg
pax freight kg departures

Operations Specication B043

2.3

FUEL EFFICIENCY CALCULATION

a i fuel L a fl fuel L a,i departures a,i pax km/L a fl i payload kg a,i distance[km] a,i fuel L a

100kg/pax

3.

RESULTS

3.1

AIRLINE COMPARISONS

27British Airways

30Lufthansa

31United

33Aeroflot

33Alitalia

33Aer Lingus

33Austrian

33American

34Scandinavian

34Delta

34Iberia

34Icelandair

35Virgin Atlantic

35Thomas Cook

35Air France

35Turkish

36KLM

37SWISS

39WOW air

44Norwegian

Excess

Fuel/pax-km

+ 13%— + 19% + 22% + 26% + 26% + 26% + 26% + 29% + 29% + 29% + 29% + 33% + 33% + 33% + 33% + 33% + 42% + 47% + 63%

INDUSTRY AVERAGE

Average Fuel Economy [pax-km/L]

Figure 1.

WHITE PAPER

3.2

AIRCRAFT-SPECIFIC ANALYSIS

0510152025303540

45

0100200300400500600

Average Fuel Eciency [pax-km/L]

Maximum Takeo Mass [tonnes]

A318 (32 seats)A380-800

B747-8

I

B747-400A340-600

B737-800B737 MAX-8

A321

B767-300ER

B767-400ER

B787-

8B787-9A350-900

B777-300ER

B777-200E

R

A340-30

0

B757-200B757-300

A330-300

A330-200

INDUSTRY AVERAG

E

B737-700

(86 seats)

Twin engin

eQuad engine

Figure 2.

3.3

DRIVERS OF TRANSATLANTIC AIRLINE EFFICIENCY

WHITE PAPER

Table 4.

RankAirlinePassenger

load factorFreight share of total tonne-kmPremium seating shareOverall seating density (seats/m 2 a

Aircraft

fuel burn b

1Norwegian

2WOW air

3SWISS

4KLM

T5Turkish

T5Air France

T5Thomas Cook

T5Virgin Atlantic

T9Icelandair

T9Iberia

T9Delta

T9Scandinavian

T13American

T13Austrian

T13Aer Lingus

T13Alitalia

T13Aeroot

18United

19Lufthansa

20British Airways

Industry Average81%21%14%1.01+5%

a As measured by seats per square meter or RGF. See footnote 1 for details. b

As measured by the average margin

of aircraft to ICAO's CO 2 standard. See footnote 2 for details.

30%39%20%

33%

35%11%15%

17% 0%

10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

20142017

Freight Shar

e

Passenger Load Factor

Seating Densit

y

Aircraft Fuel Burn

Figure 3.

WHITE PAPER

0%3%6%9%12%

15%

0%3%6%9%12%15%

Capacity, 2017

Capacity, 2014

0.50%

0.25%0%

B747-40

0B767-300ERA330-300

B777-200ER

A330-20

0

A380-800

B777-300E

R

B757-200

B767-400ER

A340-300

quotesdbs_dbs22.pdfusesText_28