Why Commercial Airliners Don’t Use Afterburners: An In-Depth Analysis

The debate about whether commercial airliners should utilize afterburners has been ongoing for decades. While military aircraft like the B-1 bomber derive significant benefits from afterburners, there are substantial drawbacks that make their use unsuitable for commercial aviation. This article delves into the key reasons why afterburners are not employed in commercial airliners, focusing on fuel efficiency, operational speed and altitude, noise regulations, weight and complexity, and market demand.

1. Fuel Efficiency

One of the primary reasons commercial airliners do not use afterburners is fuel efficiency. Afterburners increase fuel consumption by a significant margin. While they provide a substantial boost in thrust, this boost comes at the cost of efficiency. Commercial airlines prioritize fuel efficiency to minimize operating costs, especially on long-haul flights. Fuel efficiency is crucial for cost-effective operations, making afterburners a non-viable option.

The Boeing 787 Dreamliner, for instance, is designed to achieve up to 20% better fuel efficiency compared to its predecessors. Utilizing afterburners would negate these gains, making them economically unviable.

2. Cruising Speed and Altitude

Commercial airliners operate at subsonic speeds typically between Mach 0.8 and 0.85, and at altitudes around 30,000 to 40,000 feet. Afterburners are primarily beneficial at supersonic speeds, where they can provide the necessary thrust to overcome drag. Since commercial airliners do not operate in this regime, the benefits of afterburners are negligible for most commercial flights.

When a commercial airliner is not flying at supersonic speeds, the additional thrust provided by afterburners does not offer significant advantages. Standard high-bypass turbofans, which are used in commercial aviation, perform adequately for various phases of flight, including takeoff, climb, cruise, descent, and landing.

3. Noise Regulations

The noise generated by afterburners is a critical issue in civilian air travel. Regulatory bodies impose strict noise regulations to ensure that commercial aircraft are compliant and do not disrupt life in populated areas. Afterburners produce a considerable amount of noise, which is unacceptable near airports and populated regions. Consequently, commercial aircraft are designed to meet these stringent noise standards.

4. Weight and Complexity

Afterburners add significant weight and complexity to the engine design. This can lead to increased maintenance costs and reduced reliability, which are critical factors for commercial aviation. Ensuring the reliability and efficiency of engines is paramount in an industry where even minor malfunctions can have severe consequences.

To put it in perspective, the AJS 37 Viggen, a Swedish attack plane from the 1970s, utilized a modified American jet engine with a Swedish-designed afterburner. The fuel pump for the afterburner is rated at 200 horsepower, which is a remarkable feat at the time. However, this level of performance is far beyond the requirements of a commercial airliner. For a car, where a 200 horsepower fuel pump would be considered a supercar, this highlights the impracticality of afterburners in commercial aviation.

Consider the description of the fuel pump for the AJS 37 Viggen. If you had a car with an afterburner that required a 200 horsepower fuel pump, it would be a supercar. Yet, in commercial aviation, the demand for such power is minimal and impractical, leading to significant drawbacks in terms of weight, complexity, and cost.

5. Market Demand

The market for commercial aviation is primarily focused on cost-effective, reliable, and efficient transportation. Historical data shows that the demand for supersonic travel has been limited. Even the Concorde, a pioneering supersonic aircraft, had limited commercial success due to high operational costs and other challenges. The operational complexities and costs associated with supersonic travel have led to a decreased interest in such aircraft.

Conclusion

While afterburners provide significant thrust benefits for military aircraft, their drawbacks make them unsuitable for commercial airliners. Fuel efficiency, operational speed and altitude, noise regulations, weight and complexity, and market demand all play crucial roles in the decision-making process. The balance of thrust and efficiency required for commercial aviation makes afterburners an impractical and economically poor choice.