737-700 fuel Range issues

I flew a SAS 737-700 from (Boston KBOS-EKCH Copenhagen) I cruised at 41,000 ft at Mach .82 landed with 0% fuel.

To be honest I’m surprised you made it at all. The 737 -7 is never taken on a route like that. I can assure you that there’s nothing wrong with the fuel range.

If you’re flying a narrow body at a high altitude across the Atlantic, then you will need a lot of fuel especially since these kinds of planes are not made for long range. I recommend using the wide body a350 if that’s what you’re asking?

considering you cruised at the aircraft’s max altitude and speed this should be expected already. How many fuel did you put?

Hello! A few things:

The 737 can get to FL410, but you should step climb to get that high. Starting at FL330 or FL350 would be more fuel efficient when you’re heavy right after takeoff (especially for a longer flight like yours)

737s cruise from M.78-M.80

Those issues combined with the long flight time are why you had no fuel at the end.

1 Like

Quite fast. You’d be going in and out of the ‘clacker’ there :)

100% fuel no passengers or fuel just a reposition flight

so next time you do it take into account what @Rob_M said. This way you should not run out of fuel

a repositioning flight with no passengers or lbs of cargo 100% fuel

When Infinite Flight merged the BBJ and the 737-700 to one aircraft, they set the Boeing 737-700’s range to be of that of the 737 Boeing Business Jet (BBJ). Currently in Infinite Flight, we only have a standard tank configuration per aircraft. Due to that, the current 737-700 configuration can hold up to 37,830kg of fuel rather than 20,000kg. This may change in the future with Project Metal or other such reworks

1 Like

Project Metal is a rework of the graphics engine. Not related to this ;)


also 83-153 kts of tailwind so I could sustain that speed

Without proper details, one might as well start chasing ones tail. Just posting something saying “It’s wrong” doesn’t actually mean it is, unless you can provide factual evidence with accurate numbers and calculations to support it.

So instead of chasing tails, i closed this.