Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
SmartieParts

Now that's poor fuel economy!

15 posts in this topic

I just read a tidbit that a typical oil tanker averages 31 FEET per gallon of fuel.That seems a bit like having the "heavy eaters" running the cafeteria. No wonder gas prices are so high... they're using half the fuel just getting it here!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually that is not true. Ships are the most fuel efficient means of transportation in the world. Talking gallons per tonne of cargo per mile. I ran a 600 foot cargo barge in the Great Lakes for 11 years and we used to burn approx. 1000 litres of diesel an hour pushing it around. 1000 litres an hour. And we only made about 10-11 knots of speed with it. So about 100 litres a mile. Doesn't sound very good does it? But when you consider we were carrying 22,000 tonnes of cargo it is very good actually. 22,000 tonnes is equal to about 550 trucks driving down the road. At about 5 miles to the gallon or whatever a tractor trailer gets, that would be about 12,500 litres an hour. I don't know how accurate all my numbers are, but you probably get the idea. It is the same with those oil tankers, which most of them are a heck of a lot bigger than what I was talking about, the numbers get staggering. When you look at the god awful number of 31 feet per gallon it sounds pretty bad but when you figure that it is probably equal to about 2000 trucks off the road, it is down right frugal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My math really was screwed up there. A truck getting 5 miles to the gallon and say driving 65 miles an hour. That would be 13 gallons an hour or 59 litres an hour. Multiplied by the 550 trucks would be 32,450 litres an hour compared to our tug and barge burning 1000 an hour. Even bigger differential than I thought. Too much jumping back and forth between imperial and metric. :wacko:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Excellent point, and I wish there were more barges etc taking trucks off the street! 5 MPG for a loaded tractor trailer would be about right I think. Spritmonitor has a few on there, and in Europe, they're limited to 80 km/h!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited) · Report post

Our fleet is averaging 6.1 imperial mpg right now. Some O/O are getting over 7. We score the drivers on their RPM, speed and idling. But our speed limit is 105 kmh foir company trucks.

Edited by smartzuuk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My original post was in jest.I know sea transport is very economical and over-all far more efficient than air or land. I just thought 31 feet per gallon was a pretty profound number.Forget miles per gallon, that's 170 gallons per mile! - Steven

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the German Army they made me drive a Leopard 2 Tank and that thing gets around 0.7 MPG or 340 liter on 100 kilometer carries four people and a big gun.I didn't mind the 1500 PS power though roadside hazards like ditches and trees became meaningless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the German Army they made me drive a Leopard 2 Tank

Yeah... I'm sure they twisted your arm :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At the time late 80's in Germany young male citizens had to do 15 month of military or civil service I think it's called conscription here.Pay was very low and it wasn't a 8 to 5 job as they liked to send you play in the mud on weekends and over nights.But I learned a lot in those 15 month and think positive about the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the German Army they made me drive a Leopard 2 Tank and that thing gets around 0.7 MPG or 340 liter on 100 kilometer carries four people and a big gun.I didn't mind the 1500 PS power though roadside hazards like ditches and trees became meaningless.

0.7 MPG... Isn't that twice what an M1A2 gets? I thought one of the reasons the German Army went with the diesel engine rather than a gas turbine was fuel economy.I hope you don't mind me asking this, but ignoring the hard work that goes along with it, is driving a tank as much fun as it looks?? :questionmark:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only problem with all the fuel they burn is the related emissions - we are starting to be able to see a yellow streak up the Straits here from the marine traffic - and of course it is the high sulphur type fuel.There has been a real push the last while to make ship's engines more fuel efficient (they weren't bad to begin with) - hp to hp they do get pretty amazing results.One ship I was on had 2 X 6000 hp for main engines and another 2 x 6000 for the pumps (Dredge) - used to suck up the fuel pretty good - only problem it was in the Arctic and all the fuel had to be brought in around through the Bering Straits. Cheers,Cameron

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The engine is multi fuel meaning it runs on diesel or jet fuel and many other fuel sources making the tank less dependent on just one fuel source that has to be trucked in.Driving is a hoot the steering wheel looks like a yoke from an airplane and the transmission is automatic the performance is much like that of a smart car.But we getting off topic here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

    Chatbox
    You don't have permission to chat.
    Load More