throwup238 4 days ago

That’s about as useful as opening a fortune cookie and reading it off as an answer.

Straight from the horse’s mouth: https://web.archive.org/web/20230630013840/http://www.boeing...

In the first table they list 2307-2374 kg of fuel for takeoff and climb.

Reply View 1 reply
  • whycome 3 days ago

    You’re talking to the wrong horse though.

    Isn’t a 737-8 the max 8 variant? It uses newer dual CFM LEAP-1B engines. How does it compare? I can’t really find the data. The spec you’re referring to is for the older 737-800.

    Another fortune cookie:

    https://www.aircraft-commerce.com/wp-content/uploads/aircraf...

    It suggests an overall savings of ~14% over the 737-800 but doesn’t look at specific takeoff/climb comparison.

    I wasn’t posting the LLM output as a source of truth. I was just using it to question the uncited value. And I still really don’t know the answer. If you’ve got another data source I’d love to get it.

    Reply View 0 replies
umanwizard 4 days ago

Why do people keep insisting on pasting LLM output to HN when every time it happens, it gets downvoted to oblivion? The community clearly doesn't want it. If we wanted to know a computer program's opinion about something, we could ask it ourselves.

Reply View 3 replies
  • whycome 3 days ago

    I was using it to question that exact stated fuel consumption number without a citation. For hard data (like fuel consumption) getting a value from an LLM isn’t absurd.

    Reply View 2 replies
    • distances 3 days ago

      If not absurd, it's very poor form. You should never use LLM as input for a discussion, nobody wants to hear that. Use it to search for authoritative sources.

      Reply View 0 replies
    • umanwizard 3 days ago

      It’s fine if you post an actual citation that you might have found through the LLM. Just posting AI slop is worse than useless, though, and also unpleasantly dystopian.

      Reply View 0 replies
lawlessone 4 days ago

ok, how do we verify that?

Reply View 2 replies
  • whycome 3 days ago

    That’s the point? I wasn’t suggesting it was correct. Just that the value is wildly different from their own non-cited number. The next stage was to get a citation from an actual datasheet. Their reasoning was nothing beyond “I’ve read”

    Reply View 0 replies