Ewan Clegg Thanks for your comment. Airbus promised 15% lower fuel burn than existing A320 at the time and lower than 737, though 737-800 was actually around 5% more efficient per seat than A320 as it had 12 more seats. Thus, when Boeing reduced their fuel burn 14%, they had a 4% advantage per seat. Thanks for watching ;)
Top 5 most ecologic aircraft in 2020 5. 737 Max 10 (0 emissions) 4. 737 Max 7 (0 emissions) 3. 737 Max 200 (0 emissions) 2. 737 Max 9 (0 emissions) 1. 737 Max 8 (0 emissions)
airjimracing Yep, A220 was also calculated and averaged with its 160 seat layout. Most airlines to buy Max 10 will go with 230 seats as Boeing is targeting the 240 seat A321neo for Low cost airlines. Thanks for watching!
@@oneskyflyer Question though could Boeing 737 Max 10 be a replacement for the Workhorse Boeing 757's & 767's but I could wrong maybe the NMA B797 What do think do Boeing have A fighting Chance?
Chirag Chaudhuri Yep, the 737 still wins in efficiency despite its age. The Max doesn’t have a composite body but more parts are now composite :) Thanks for tuning in
This is a win for Boeing with there Boeing 737 Max 10 I Believe Airbus is gonna win in 2023 or 2024 with there New A321XLR's when there release comes after COVID-19 is gone forever.
Karlos Sargeant Thanks for your comment. Absolutely the future of Transatlantic flights would see more single aisle aircraft flying directly to their destinations. Thanks for watching :)
Yup: As long as this is only about passengers. But that criteria is backasswards as anymore the cargo is just as important for profit revenue as the passengers.
@@stradivarioushardhiantz5179 Nope: What they might do is put more powerful engines on the smaller versions of the same plane type for new build, but used? Anything goes as long as it flies...
@@w8stral let us see; A321-200P2F has 27t max capacity over A320P2F with 21t www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1385897 Or 777-300ERSF has 101t max capacity almost the same capacity to 777F with 102t as both aircraft share the same engine type the GE90-115B & with almost 10m longer cabin making 777-300ERSF to be more versatile loaded with many kinds of cargo compare to volume based types of cargo www.flightglobal.com/mro/gecas-and-iai-launch-777-300er-cargo-conversion/134817.article
@@stradivarioushardhiantz5179 Majority of freighters are volume constrained or weight constrained? Weight constrained. Extra volume just means extra drag and extra structural weight. Take those same larger engines swap them onto the Smaller frame and that is exactly what you want for MOST, freight. There are some types of cargo that are volume constrained, but those are rare. Now lets talk reality; you have to look at take off velocity in normal hot conditions instead of STP, so the larger aircraft stretched version that you quoted will in actuality, NOT be able to pick it up. Whereas the freighter version can. What do both airplanes quoted have? Larger engines than their kid brothers. WHy both can be converted for freight, but say, a 777-200 and 777-200ER will never be converted to freight. Not that it matters as most cargo boys, just care about $$$ into plane to begin with. The big cargo boys buy new optimized planes for their MTOW. Why the 767 is still being made, though with a a330-900freighter version... maybe they both disappear. Maybe with Caronavirus downturn, Boeing makes a quick 787-8F Version(doubt it as would cannibalize 777F. I would not be surprised if everyone cancels 777X, they do a quick 777XF. Would be very easy to do.
Eduardo Meller Thanks for your comment. Per trip it is, but the extra seats on A220 gives it an edge. Also A220 can fly much further. Thanks for watching
@@oneskyflyer Yep, so using your own numbers, if you take the 146 passengers version of the E195-E2, the fuel burn is 1.97L/100 km per sit. Lower than the A220. Can you tell me where did you take the numbers from, please?
Ziolin Camba Not too sure on either though Avatar has been touting this order for a Long time now. Don’t think Turkish would order the 747-8 given they are deferring their 787 orders. Thanks for tuning in :)
@@jdf1stats, here. Proof to you that I'm right www.google.com/amp/s/www.aerotime.aero/oleg.volkov/19823-turkish-airlines-to-buy-8-747-8i-jumbo-jets%3fv=amp
Ker Dylan Thanks for your enquiry. The A350-1000 is a stretch of the -900 and thus has slightly higher trip cost but significantly lower seat cost and fuel burn per trip. According to Lufthansa, the -1000 is 5% under the -900 in terms of fuel burn. Thanks for watching!
@ If your only criteria is warm bodies. IF you wish to carry cargo, everyone does, then the long pencils are Worse as you cannot carry any cargo. Cargo always flies even if passengers do not. Thus in off season for travel destinations(most routes around world) the airline can still make money and why you go with the shorter version while the long boys lose their shirts.
The Transporter Thanks for your comment. Yep, the Max 10 is the most efficient though not the most capable single aisle out there, but enough to clinch the TOP spot in Efficiency. Thanks for watching
Shaheen That would be a killer. The A220-500 would have the lowest seat cost ever, though admittedly at the slight expense of range. Thanks for watching!
737 max is definitely has some of the best fuel efficiency numbers of any plane. Even a little better than the A320Neo that is why they are more expensive. Despite the crashes not many companies have cancelled orders for the plane the Coronavirus pandemic might have saved Boeing because it’s hurting everyone.
Thanks for your comment. Absolutely, its trip cost and seat cost are pretty low. 737 Max has however received more order cancellations than A320neo. Thanks for tuning in!
If the list made up from manufacturers information or actual in service operational data? If list is made up from actual in service operational data, the B777-9, A32XLR and B737 MAX 10 shouldn't be included as they are not in operational revenue service.
I think the A330 NEO has some life left in it, but Airbus will need to put a composite wing, folding wingtips/winglets, and a geared turbofan on it. The GEnx has pretty much torched the Trent 1000 on efficiency (hence converting Air New Zealand and ANA), and it hasn't had ceramic matrix composites integrated into the rotating and hot sections yet. Another 10% engine efficiency, another 3-4% aerodynamic efficiency from the longer wingspan at the same weight, and the A330-800 would be able to fly the A350-900 ULR's missions. Same thing goes for the 787-8. Being the lighter plane vs. the -9, it should fly farther, but it has to have its commonality problems fixed up and have the range recalculated on the base model. With the laminar tail section and other improvements from its bigger brothers, the latest -8s should be flying 14,500-15,000km, which would then be more competitive to the A330-800's 15,000km range.
Do you agree with the list? And in YOUR opinion, which is the MOST EFFICIENT? Let me know in the comments below! Thanks for tuning in and till we meet next time, wishing everyone a truly Clear Sky Ahead!
dustine adamos It is a very efficient widebody, especially against aircraft of its size, but the most efficient airplane? Nope. In its class? Yes. Thanks for tuning in :)
I disagree totally you’re putting your life on the line we are flying by Maxs body was built in the 1950s raised up even pilot slide in the 1980s when they made major changes to the engines there was a problem that generation of parents have already retired and the pain is still in the air just with a different Pilot will tell you this is one of the oldest body frames that was designed in the 1950s if anyone was educated would read about it I would not get into this place anymore
The A350 is still my favourite no matter what.
Skydav 17 Yep, it’s a great aircraft! Thanks for watching :)
yes even mine
A380 for me
The 747 would always be for be. The queen would somos be 51 years old
soon*
Darn I missed it I was at the store
Pilot Sam 004 It’s ok! Thanks for tuning in :)
@@oneskyflyer np :)
I don’t really understand how the Max’s are higher that the A321 because wasn’t the A320neo still meant to be more efficient than the Max’s?
well... I learned from a video that the max is more efficient on shorter domestic routes while the neo is more efficient on longer routes
Ewan Clegg Thanks for your comment. Airbus promised 15% lower fuel burn than existing A320 at the time and lower than 737, though 737-800 was actually around 5% more efficient per seat than A320 as it had 12 more seats. Thus, when Boeing reduced their fuel burn 14%, they had a 4% advantage per seat. Thanks for watching ;)
Airbus Boi Yep, the Neo has the legs especially the new XLR but the Max is lighter. Thanks for watching
@@airbus_a320neo Max is most efficient on 0km routes, because its the only route it can fly.
@@adamsiroky161 lmao
Top 5 most ecologic aircraft in 2020
5. 737 Max 10 (0 emissions)
4. 737 Max 7 (0 emissions)
3. 737 Max 200 (0 emissions)
2. 737 Max 9 (0 emissions)
1. 737 Max 8 (0 emissions)
IT BURNS FUEL ITS NOT 0 EMMISION
EMMISION IS THE CARBO DIOXIDE
IF ITS EFFICIENT IT STILL BURNS FUEL!!!
@@goodccvoid all of these airplanes are groundet . That meaes theare are not allowed to fly per burn fuel
Embraer E2 190 is more efficient than ALL. Where is Comac and MC21 ? Only Boeing and Airbus and with wrong stats
Maybe cuz they arent take off or that they are not as efficient as all ac on this list
@@taikhoan6546 E190 e2 of Embraer is the most efficient per passenger
Very informative and interesting video!
Thank you very much 😊
Airbus is King!
I know you
What’s with the Wii Sports Resort music?? I LOVE IT
Bosstron 5000 Thanks!
It doesn't matter how efficient a plane is if it kills it's passengers. Safety before profit is something Boeing still don't seem to have grasped
ya nice video
Best video about the efficiency of modern planes👍
More top10 about planes please
you give no figures for the 777-300 ER, so how can you put it in 2nd place???
Thanks for the info.
Where is the Embraer Ejet 190 E2 ? This a machine off efficiency
O yeah, poor Embraer
Get this guy to 10k subs!!!!
Hank Dickerson Thanks for your support!
I'm missing the MD-80 AKA the mad dog. Delta previously retired them😔. Anyways great video!
yourprodude 124 Yep, its sad the mad dogs are fast going, though the new A220 is a worthy replacement. Thanks for your support!
@@oneskyflyer The A220 is indeed a worthy replacement. Your welcome for the support =)
@@rak7673er but the classic its always the classic
I don't think that was fair. The Max 10 was calculated with Max configuration. Was the A321 or A220 calculated the same?
Like he said, in their most optimal configuration, and I assume he is using as published by the manufacturer.
airjimracing Yep, A220 was also calculated and averaged with its 160 seat layout. Most airlines to buy Max 10 will go with 230 seats as Boeing is targeting the 240 seat A321neo for Low cost airlines. Thanks for watching!
@@oneskyflyer Wow, how can a 60 year old design be on top, even with upgraded aero and engines, campared to the latest technology on the A220?
@@jdf1stats get ur facts clear, 320 neo, xlr also based on 1980’s. but both have done significant changes
@@prasenjittripura4691 I was referring to the A220.
loved the video
Reshma Noor Thanks!
great work
CRAZY TOP 10 Thanks for your support ;)
That wii sports plus music really hit different.
Make a video in ATR aircraft or more aircraft fuel efficiency.
Which is better A350-1000 vs A350-900 and can u start making review on model aircrafts?
the beginning is too long shorten it and get to the planes fast
Flex your wings Carbon fibre gang.💪
AG DCA 24 Lol, carbon fibre does indeed reduce weight. And it curves!
@@oneskyflyer i know. Better for efficiency,range and etc.
@@oneskyflyer Question though could Boeing 737 Max 10 be a replacement for the Workhorse Boeing 757's & 767's but I could wrong maybe the NMA B797 What do think do Boeing have A fighting Chance?
Are you still involved in the other channel ? (TF...).
Would have been surprised if it wasn't one of the MAX series. The new composite body spoke for itself.
Chirag Chaudhuri Yep, the 737 still wins in efficiency despite its age. The Max doesn’t have a composite body but more parts are now composite :) Thanks for tuning in
This is a win for Boeing with there Boeing 737 Max 10 I Believe Airbus is gonna win in 2023 or 2024 with there New A321XLR's when there release comes after COVID-19 is gone forever.
Karlos Sargeant Thanks for your comment. Absolutely the future of Transatlantic flights would see more single aisle aircraft flying directly to their destinations. Thanks for watching :)
I love Boeing 737 max 10
Smaller engine with the longest cabin...that's the formula🛫
Yup: As long as this is only about passengers. But that criteria is backasswards as anymore the cargo is just as important for profit revenue as the passengers.
@@w8stral then I'm wondering if there will be P2F version of A321neo & A220-300 for narrowbody or 787-10BCF & A350-1000P2F for widebody
@@stradivarioushardhiantz5179 Nope: What they might do is put more powerful engines on the smaller versions of the same plane type for new build, but used? Anything goes as long as it flies...
@@w8stral let us see;
A321-200P2F has 27t max capacity over A320P2F with 21t
www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1385897
Or 777-300ERSF has 101t max capacity almost the same capacity to 777F with 102t as both aircraft share the same engine type the GE90-115B & with almost 10m longer cabin making 777-300ERSF to be more versatile loaded with many kinds of cargo compare to volume based types of cargo
www.flightglobal.com/mro/gecas-and-iai-launch-777-300er-cargo-conversion/134817.article
@@stradivarioushardhiantz5179 Majority of freighters are volume constrained or weight constrained? Weight constrained. Extra volume just means extra drag and extra structural weight. Take those same larger engines swap them onto the Smaller frame and that is exactly what you want for MOST, freight. There are some types of cargo that are volume constrained, but those are rare. Now lets talk reality; you have to look at take off velocity in normal hot conditions instead of STP, so the larger aircraft stretched version that you quoted will in actuality, NOT be able to pick it up. Whereas the freighter version can.
What do both airplanes quoted have? Larger engines than their kid brothers. WHy both can be converted for freight, but say, a 777-200 and 777-200ER will never be converted to freight. Not that it matters as most cargo boys, just care about $$$ into plane to begin with. The big cargo boys buy new optimized planes for their MTOW. Why the 767 is still being made, though with a a330-900freighter version... maybe they both disappear. Maybe with Caronavirus downturn, Boeing makes a quick 787-8F Version(doubt it as would cannibalize 777F. I would not be surprised if everyone cancels 777X, they do a quick 777XF. Would be very easy to do.
Great video.☺️
Thanks for your support!
AirplaneProductions ur welcome.☺️
Embraer E195-E2 is 10% more fuel efficient than the A220-300. Where are you taking the numbers from?
Eduardo Meller Thanks for your comment. Per trip it is, but the extra seats on A220 gives it an edge. Also A220 can fly much further. Thanks for watching
@@oneskyflyer Yep, so using your own numbers, if you take the 146 passengers version of the E195-E2, the fuel burn is 1.97L/100 km per sit. Lower than the A220. Can you tell me where did you take the numbers from, please?
Hi adib. (Airplane production) remember me ? I am ibnul.
Burhanul Haque Shimul Yep of course, thanks for tuning in to this one!
Would a zeppelin with hybrid power not be the most efficient airship ?
Could be
Avatar Airlines says that they will order 30 747-8is ass it is cheaper?
And Turkish Airlines is planning to order 8 747-8is soon?
Ziolin Camba Not too sure on either though Avatar has been touting this order for a Long time now. Don’t think Turkish would order the 747-8 given they are deferring their 787 orders. Thanks for tuning in :)
But it's true. On September 7 2017, Turkish Airlines is eyeing to order the Boeing 747-8i. Same as Arik Air.
@@ZC_Offcials That's a while ago, but I hope you're right.
@@jdf1stats, here. Proof to you that I'm right
www.google.com/amp/s/www.aerotime.aero/oleg.volkov/19823-turkish-airlines-to-buy-8-747-8i-jumbo-jets%3fv=amp
@@ZC_Offcials nice.....747-8 it is the mosy beautiful plane on the world
THE FUCKING WII SPORTS MUSIC HAHAHAHAHAHA
How is the A350-1000 more efficient then the 900?
Ker Dylan Thanks for your enquiry. The A350-1000 is a stretch of the -900 and thus has slightly higher trip cost but significantly lower seat cost and fuel burn per trip. According to Lufthansa, the -1000 is 5% under the -900 in terms of fuel burn. Thanks for watching!
@ If your only criteria is warm bodies. IF you wish to carry cargo, everyone does, then the long pencils are Worse as you cannot carry any cargo. Cargo always flies even if passengers do not. Thus in off season for travel destinations(most routes around world) the airline can still make money and why you go with the shorter version while the long boys lose their shirts.
The a320neo does not even figure in the top 10?
The b777-300 is more efficient than the b777-X???
@@tonydecastro6340 Odd and yet the -8Max does... Go figure for his criteria.
I love the list I swore airbus would top the list but Boeing has been showing some fight.
The Transporter Thanks for your comment. Yep, the Max 10 is the most efficient though not the most capable single aisle out there, but enough to clinch the TOP spot in Efficiency. Thanks for watching
But the boeing 737s dont fly for long -crash soon after takeoff-right across the range
a350-1000 xwb first place
Could you imagine an A220-500. Look out B737-M10
Shaheen That would be a killer. The A220-500 would have the lowest seat cost ever, though admittedly at the slight expense of range. Thanks for watching!
Too bad the Max tends to crash...
O yeah, it could be better and Boeing could do it better. But I don't know was going on with them
Hey
Scarlett Zhu Thanks for tuning in! Did you agree that Max 10 is most efficient? Curious to know :)
1:30 Bangldesh
737 max is definitely has some of the best fuel efficiency numbers of any plane. Even a little better than the A320Neo that is why they are more expensive. Despite the crashes not many companies have cancelled orders for the plane the Coronavirus pandemic might have saved Boeing because it’s hurting everyone.
Thanks for your comment. Absolutely, its trip cost and seat cost are pretty low. 737 Max has however received more order cancellations than A320neo. Thanks for tuning in!
@@oneskyflyer Unless Boeing gets it right, and they return to their true machine from the past.
Boeing like most American car manufactures fudge their numbers a bit. I think that the 321 NEO has the best burn
The MAX is still is not burning any fuel, in the sky. and Boeings numbers are like the sticker on a car while the 321 NEO's come from real line flying
Not all Americans things are bad. And Both of this company were legend in the pass. But instead they disrespect their founders
If the list made up from manufacturers information or actual in service operational data? If list is made up from actual in service operational data, the B777-9, A32XLR and B737 MAX 10 shouldn't be included as they are not in operational revenue service.
Wrong results because you cannot compare 3 or 2 class configuration with 1 dense economy class, redo the math with max seating 1 class for all
The 737 max 8 is quite fuel efficient but lion air had a bad incident with the plane so I think the 737 max 8 is the worst plane in your video😢
You have way too many commercial breaks. very annoying
I think the A330 NEO has some life left in it, but Airbus will need to put a composite wing, folding wingtips/winglets, and a geared turbofan on it.
The GEnx has pretty much torched the Trent 1000 on efficiency (hence converting Air New Zealand and ANA), and it hasn't had ceramic matrix composites integrated into the rotating and hot sections yet. Another 10% engine efficiency, another 3-4% aerodynamic efficiency from the longer wingspan at the same weight, and the A330-800 would be able to fly the A350-900 ULR's missions.
Same thing goes for the 787-8. Being the lighter plane vs. the -9, it should fly farther, but it has to have its commonality problems fixed up and have the range recalculated on the base model. With the laminar tail section and other improvements from its bigger brothers, the latest -8s should be flying 14,500-15,000km, which would then be more competitive to the A330-800's 15,000km range.
Cant understand what this guy says.
Do you agree with the list? And in YOUR opinion, which is the MOST EFFICIENT? Let me know in the comments below! Thanks for tuning in and till we meet next time, wishing everyone a truly Clear Sky Ahead!
Well A350 dubbed as the "world's most efficient/advanced Airliner"
dustine adamos It is a very efficient widebody, especially against aircraft of its size, but the most efficient airplane? Nope. In its class? Yes. Thanks for tuning in :)
You absolute....ffff
Wouldn’t you know it ?! The most efficient aircraft is the 737 MAX - the plane with M-CRASH ...
the 737 a deadly efficientcy.
I disagree totally you’re putting your life on the line we are flying by Maxs body was built in the 1950s raised up even pilot slide in the 1980s when they made major changes to the engines there was a problem that generation of parents have already retired and the pain is still in the air just with a different Pilot will tell you this is one of the oldest body frames that was designed in the 1950s if anyone was educated would read about it I would not get into this place anymore