exhaustgases wrote:The numbers don't look right for 3 huge jet engines at a 38K burn in 2 hours.
So what is take off power approximate? And what is 10k hp in turbine terms? That's what I'm guessing engine out put is at
that fuel consumption.
Sorry if you don't like the numbers, but the chart was a copy of the AOM as given to Continental Airlines DC-10 crews. This also assumes a landing weight of 320,000 pounds. So let's work out a few items.
The "empty weight" of a DC-10-30 in passenger config is ~267,000 pounds, so it assumes you're flying with a fixed payload of 53,000lbs (passengers and fuel reserves). Now, considering that this includes a full passenger cabin as well, the DC-10 Tankers, while DC-10-30 models, have their interiors and cargo handling equipment removed, so the dead weight of the tank and associated modifications should be a wash if not a net loss in weight. The standard domestic fuel reserves are usually around 20,000 pounds (so takeoff fuel would be a minimum of 60,000 pounds of fuel), meaning that they can carry 33,000 pounds of whatever they want and still meet that number since the plane is landing without retardant onboard. Even though the "live load" of Phos-Chek is ~105,000 lbs, that weight only applies to the first half of the flight. With a jet, this is meaningless to fuel consumption for the most part since any penalty to fuel consumption on the "out" leg of the sortie is at minimum counteracted by the "in" leg which can also be flown at a higher altitude and thus lower fuel consumption.
Aviation turbofan and turbojet engines are not rated by horsepower, only thrust. The CF6-50C is rated at ~50,000 pounds of thrust depending on the exact configuration. Power setting on takeoff varies significantly depending on temperature and pressure altitude, but at sea level on a standard day, power is set at 111.7% N1 for takeoff and then is reduced to 99.1% for the start of climb before rising back to ~102.6% N1 at the top of climb (12,500 feet per Larry and the 10 Tanker website). Beyond that, I don't have the charts, but again, 38,000 pounds is about right for the burn-off on a 2-hour mission. It sounds low because high bypass turbofan engines are extraordinarily efficient when pulled back for cruise.
Oh, and by comparison, 38,000 pounds of fuel is more than what a 737-300 (like the ones that Coulson bought) can hold IN TOTAL (35,600lbs) and it has 2 engines that together almost equal the power of 1x DC-10 engine. So, again, you think it sounds "small", but it's not.