• CodeInvasion@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    10 months ago

    Small aircraft have a carbon equivalent to large cars. My plane is from 1961 and has a fuel economy of 15mpg as the crow flies (arguably closer to 25mpg because of straight line measurements versus winding roads that can almost double the distance), seats 4 people comfortably, and flies at 160 mph.

    • elephantium@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      10 months ago

      Hmm, interesting. I had the opposite impression. Maybe from discussion of private jets? I wonder how commercial jets vs. private jets vs. light aircraft fare – similar to cars vs. buses, perhaps? I haven’t actually dug much into this subject :\

      • jarfil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        how commercial jets vs. private jets vs. light aircraft fare

        Just looked some up, they’re approximately, per passenger:

        • -, bus, ~100…300mpg/pp
        • Commercial jet, -, ~60…120mpg/pp
        • Ultralight, motorbike, train, ~50mpg/pp
        • Light aircraft, car, ~15…60mpg/pp
        • Private jet, limo, ~5…50mpg/pp
        • Fighter jet, monster truck, ~0.5mpg/pp

        The more passengers, the more efficient.

        So, fully loaded, there isn’t that much difference between a private jet, a limo, a car, light aircraft, ultralight, motorbike, train, or low range commercial jet.

        But if it’s a single person, a private jet would use 10 times more fuel than a motorbike.

        A fully loaded bus, still wins hands down.

      • SomeAmateur@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Props tend to be more efficient aircraft when it comes to fuel consumption but fly relatively low and slow. Jets are faster so they make more sense for ferrying people and cargo but they burn more fuel in the process.

      • rexxit@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        10 months ago

        It was caught in FAA-Bureauctatic hell for 15+ years and just approved last year. It will be still be slow to become available and adopt for reasons that are complicated, but amount to bureaucracy, economics, and an insane degree of risk aversion. The vast majority of pilots want unleaded and it’s also much better for the engines.