Boeing 787-9 posts 6.7% better fuel burn than A350-900, but capacity gap complicates comparison
This digest was compiled by AI from multiple sources — links to the originals are below.
The Boeing 787-9 burns 6.7% less fuel per mile than the Airbus A350-900 based on manufacturer maximum-range and usable-fuel figures, achieving 0.286 miles per gallon against 0.268. The margin narrows when passenger capacity and operating economics are included, with block-hour costs estimated at $16,899 for the 787-9 versus $18,370 for the A350-900.
Fuel Burn and Range
The 787-9 carries up to 33,399 US gallons of usable fuel and has a maximum range of 9,550 miles, producing 0.286 miles per gallon (822 liters per 100 km). The A350-900 holds 36,456 gallons and reaches 9,782 miles, yielding 0.268 miles per gallon (878 liters per 100 km). These figures derive from Airbus and Boeing airport characteristic planning documents and represent upper-limit estimates at maximum range and fuel capacity.
Variant Sales
Boeing has delivered 1,289 787s, of which 749 are 787-9s; Airbus has delivered 718 A350s, with 606 A350-900s as of May 2026. The 787-9 and A350-900 are the best-selling variants in their respective families. The 787 family includes the 787-8, 787-9, and 787-10, ordered by size and launch date.
Operating Cost
FlyingFuel estimates the cost of operating a 787-9 per block hour at $16,899, compared with $18,370 for the A350-900, a difference of $1,471. The per-seat economics depend on configured passenger counts, which are not listed by manufacturers. The 787-9's raw fuel-burn advantage does not automatically equate to lower cost per seat if the A350-900 carries more passengers.
What's Next
Airlines weighing the two widebodies are expected to compare per-seat fuel burn and route-specific load factors before ordering new capacity. It remains unclear whether the 787-9's lower raw fuel burn or the A350-900's larger cabin will dominate in a downturn.
1 source
Boeing 787-9 posts 6.7% better fuel burn than A350-900, but capacity gap complicates comparison
