Rajan Wilcox
The Boeing 737 is a widely used aircraft with a range of models, including the 737-700, 737-800, and 737-900ER. The fuel capacity and consumption of these aircraft vary depending on the model and flight conditions. For example, the 737-800 burns approximately 850 US gallons (3,200 litres) of jet fuel per hour, while shorter flights using this model consume about 2.5-3 tons (5,500-6,600 pounds) per hour. The 737-700C, a convertible variant, can be outfitted with nine auxiliary fuel tanks, increasing its fuel capacity to 10,707 US gallons (40,530 litres). Overall, the 737NG (Next Generation) series offers greater fuel capacity than its predecessor, the 737 Classic.
Explore related products
What You'll Learn
The 737-800 burns 850 US gallons of jet fuel per hour
The 737-800 is the most common variant of the 737NG (Next Generation) family. It burns 850 US gallons (3,200 litres) of jet fuel per hour, which is approximately 80% of the fuel used by an MD-80 on a comparable flight, while carrying more passengers. The Airline Monitor, an industry publication, quotes a 737-800 fuel burn of 4.88 US gallons (18.5 litres) per seat per hour, compared to 5.13 US gallons (19.4 litres) for the A320.
The 737NG is an upgrade of the 737 Classic series, featuring a redesigned wing with a larger area, a wider wingspan, greater fuel capacity, and higher maximum takeoff weights (MTOW) and longer range. The series includes four variants, the -600/-700/-800/-900, seating between 108 and 215 passengers. The 737-800 is the most popular variant, with 4,991 commercial, 191 military, and 23 corporate orders, totalling 5,205 aircraft.
In 2011, United Airlines operated the first US commercial flight using a blend of algae-derived biofuel and traditional jet fuel to reduce its carbon footprint. The flight, from Houston to Chicago, was powered by a blend of 850 US gallons of jet fuel and algae-derived biofuel. This initiative demonstrates the aviation industry's efforts to explore alternative fuel sources and reduce their environmental impact.
The 737-800's fuel efficiency can be further enhanced through various improvements and modifications. For instance, the CFM56-7B Evolution nacelle, introduced in mid-2011, claims to improve overall fuel burn by at least 1%. Additionally, the use of Messier-Bugatti-Dowty's carbon brakes instead of steel brakes can reduce weight by 550-700 pounds, resulting in a 0.5% reduction in fuel burn. These enhancements not only optimise fuel efficiency but also contribute to the aircraft's overall performance and carbon footprint reduction.
The 737-800's fuel capacity and efficiency make it a popular choice for airlines worldwide. With its ability to carry a significant fuel load, the aircraft can operate on long-haul routes and accommodate varying payload requirements. Ryanair, for example, is one of the largest operators of the 737-800, utilising its range and capacity to serve routes across Europe, the Middle East, and North Africa.
The Weight of Fuel: How Much Does It Affect Performance?
You may want to see also
Explore related products
The 737NG has a greater fuel capacity than the 737 Classic
The 737NG is an upgrade of the 737 Classic series, which includes the -300, -400, and -500 models. The 737NG series, on the other hand, includes the -600, -700, -800, and -900 variants. The 737NG has a number of improvements over the 737 Classic, one of which is its greater fuel capacity.
The 737NG has a redesigned wing with a larger area and a wider wingspan, which contributes to its increased fuel capacity. The enhanced wing design also allows for higher maximum takeoff weights (MTOW) and a longer range. The 737NG's range is over 3,000 nautical miles, enabling transcontinental flights.
The 737-800, a popular variant of the 737NG, burns 850 US gallons (3,200 litres) of jet fuel per hour. This is about 80% of the fuel used by an MD-80 on a comparable flight, despite carrying more passengers. The 737-800's fuel efficiency is further enhanced by the use of carbon brakes, which reduce the weight of the brake package by 550-700 pounds (250-320 kg) compared to steel brakes. This weight reduction results in a 0.5% reduction in fuel burn.
The 737NG also features CFM International CFM56-7 series engines, which are more fuel-efficient and quieter than previous engines. The CFM56-7BE variant of this engine provides a two-percent improvement in fuel consumption, leading to a corresponding reduction in carbon emissions. Additionally, the 737NG offers a flexible maintenance program with longer check intervals and more revenue-flying days.
Overall, the 737NG's combination of improved wing design, more efficient engines, and weight reduction strategies contributes to its greater fuel capacity and improved performance compared to the 737 Classic. These enhancements have made the 737NG a popular choice for airlines, with over 7,000 aircraft ordered as of May 2025.
Understanding Generator Fuel Consumption: How Much Fuel Do They Use?
You may want to see also
Explore related products
The 737-700C can be outfitted with nine auxiliary fuel tanks
The Boeing 737 is an American narrow-body aircraft that has been in service since 1968. The 737 has evolved through four generations, offering several variants for 85 to 215 passengers. The 737NG (Next Generation) is an upgrade of the 737 Classic series, with a redesigned wing, a wider wingspan, greater fuel capacity, and higher maximum takeoff weights (MTOW) and longer range.
One of the 737NG variants is the 737-700C, a convertible version where the seats can be removed to carry cargo instead. The 737-700C was launched by Boeing on January 31, 2006, with All Nippon Airways as the launch customer. The 737-700ER (Extended Range) features the fuselage of the 737-700 and the wings and landing gear of the 737-800.
It's worth noting that the 737-800 variant, which is the most common version of the 737NG, burns 850 US gallons (3,200 L) of jet fuel per hour. This fuel efficiency contributes to the overall performance and range capabilities of the 737 family.
Iceland's Fuel Prices: A Costly Surprise
You may want to see also
Explore related products
The 737-800 burns 4.88 US gallons of fuel per seat per hour
The 737-800 is the most common variant of the 737NG (Next Generation) family. It burns 850 US gallons (3,200 litres) of jet fuel per hour. The fuel burn per seat per hour is 4.88 US gallons (18.5 litres). This is lower than the fuel burn of a comparable flight on an MD-80, which burns 5.13 US gallons (19.4 litres) per seat per hour.
The 737NG is an upgrade of the 737 Classic series, with a redesigned wing, wider wingspan, greater fuel capacity, and higher maximum takeoff weights (MTOW). The series includes four variants: the -600, -700, -800, and -900, seating between 108 and 215 passengers. The most-ordered variant is the 737-800, with a total of 5,205 aircraft ordered as of May 2025.
The 737-800 has been used by airlines to reduce their carbon footprint. For example, in 2011, United Airlines operated the first US commercial flight powered by a blend of algae-derived biofuel and traditional jet fuel. This flight was from Houston to Chicago.
The fuel economy of an aircraft is a measure of its transport energy efficiency. Fuel efficiency can be increased by improving aerodynamics, reducing weight, and improving engine brake-specific fuel consumption and propulsive efficiency. Additionally, endurance and range can be maximized by flying at optimum altitudes, which are usually higher.
The 737-800's fuel burn of 4.88 US gallons per seat per hour is a result of its improved fuel efficiency compared to other aircraft. This lower fuel burn contributes to its popularity among airlines and helps reduce their environmental impact.
Lucas Fuel Treatment: How Much Per Gallon?
You may want to see also
Explore related products
The 737-800 burns 2.5-3 tons of fuel per hour
The Boeing 737-800 is part of the 737NG (Next Generation) family, which is an upgrade of the 737 Classic series. The 737NG series includes four variants: the -600, -700, -800, and -900, with the -800 being the most commonly ordered variant. This aircraft type burns 2.5-3 tons (5,500-6,600 pounds or 850 US gallons) of jet fuel per hour for shorter flights.
The 737-800 is known for its fuel efficiency, burning about 80% of the fuel used by an MD-80 on a comparable flight while carrying more passengers. This efficiency is further enhanced by Boeing's introduction of Messier-Bugatti-Dowty's carbon brakes for the Next-Gen 737s, which reduce brake weight and, consequently, fuel burn. The CFM56-7B Evolution nacelle, tested in 2009 and intended for the new 737 PIP (Performance Improvement Package), is expected to improve fuel burn by at least 1% on longer stages.
The 737-800's fuel efficiency contributes to its popularity among airlines. As of May 2019, Boeing had delivered 4,979 737-800s, and it remains a common aircraft choice for commercial flights. For example, in 2011, United Airlines operated the first US commercial flight using a blend of algae-derived biofuel and traditional jet fuel to reduce its carbon footprint. This flight, from Houston to Chicago, was powered by a Boeing 737-800.
The 737-800's fuel capacity and efficiency contribute to its versatility and environmental sustainability, making it a preferred aircraft choice for airlines worldwide.
Aviation Fuel Weight: Gallon to Pound Ratio
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
A 737-800 burns 850 US gallons (3,200 litres) of jet fuel per hour. Shorter flights using this aircraft burn about 2.5-3 tons (5,500-6,600 pounds) per hour.
The 737-700C can be outfitted with nine auxiliary fuel tanks, allowing it to hold 10,707 US gallons (40,530 litres; 8,915 imperial gallons) of fuel.
A Boeing 737 typically burns around 746.27 gallons of fuel per hour, which equates to approximately 12.44 gallons per minute.
Yes, the fuel consumption of a 737 varies depending on the model and flight conditions. For example, the 737-800 burns 850 US gallons of jet fuel per hour, while the 737-700C can hold 10,707 US gallons of fuel with its auxiliary tanks.
The 737-800 burns about 80% of the fuel used by an MD-80 on a comparable flight, while carrying more passengers. It also has a lower fuel burn per seat per hour than the Airbus A320 (4.88 US gallons vs 5.13 US gallons).
