Yesterday at LAX the spot price for Jet A Kerosene was a staggering $3.93 a gallon. Thats more than you are probably paying for the gas in your car and a 777-300ER holds 47,890 gal of the stuff. That's $188,000 for them to fill'er up. The same day in 2003, Jet A Kerosene was 74 cents/gal at LAX.
So 5 years ago a 47,890 gallon tank o' gas was only $35,000. Now if you fig're the 777's hold 316 passengers fully loaded, if you simply divide the $188,000 tank of gas by 316 thats $595 per passenger if you took off from LAX and flew the 777 until it crashed into the ocean out of fuel. All kinds of complicated factors come into play but I think it is safe to say it would 'almost' make it to BKK from LAX without refueling so for the sake of argument say it now costs the airline $600 just for fuel alone ONE WAY LAX-Hong Kong. That's $1200!!! round trip per passenger just for fuel alone, never mind the cost of the plane, the crew or anything else. The economics are crystal clear. If fuel prices remain where they are now or continue to climb..... some airline is going out of business.
Now does anyone on here want to make a suggestion as to who?
So 5 years ago a 47,890 gallon tank o' gas was only $35,000. Now if you fig're the 777's hold 316 passengers fully loaded, if you simply divide the $188,000 tank of gas by 316 thats $595 per passenger if you took off from LAX and flew the 777 until it crashed into the ocean out of fuel. All kinds of complicated factors come into play but I think it is safe to say it would 'almost' make it to BKK from LAX without refueling so for the sake of argument say it now costs the airline $600 just for fuel alone ONE WAY LAX-Hong Kong. That's $1200!!! round trip per passenger just for fuel alone, never mind the cost of the plane, the crew or anything else. The economics are crystal clear. If fuel prices remain where they are now or continue to climb..... some airline is going out of business.
Now does anyone on here want to make a suggestion as to who?
