Objective To investigate the feasibility and dosimetric characteristics of using dual-arc volumetric modulated arc therapy and multiple partial-arc VMAT for T3 lung cancer. Methods From June 2016 to May 2018, thirteen lung cancer patients with large planning target volume were replanned with dual full arcs VMAT(F-VMAT) and six partial-arc s VMAT(P-VMAT)on RayStation v4.5 RayArc function.PTV volume median was 550.9cm3(ranged 402.2-834.8cm3) and to a prescribed dose of 60 Gy in 30 fractions.Equivalent target coverage was required for all plans, and clinical goals were evaluated using various dose-volume metrics.These included PTV dose conformity, mean lung/heart dose, lung V5, V10, V20, V30, heart V30 and V40, and Dmax of spinal canal.The total monitor units (MUs) were also examined. Results All VMAT plans satisfied the treatment criteria.F-VMAT achieved better homogeneity index(HI) and MUs than P-VMRT(t=-3.904, P=0.002), and the conformal number(CN) of tumor volumes was likely clinically indistinguishable.However, F-VMAT significantly reduced lung V5, V10 and mean lung dose[V5: (51.31±5.36)% vs.(43.44±5.28)%, t=6.908, P=0.00; V10: (38.34±3.26)% vs.(34.05±3.74)%, t=4.632, P=0.001; Dmean: (1 449±117.19)cGy vs.(1 375.38±148.98)cGy, t=4.93, P=0.00], and heart dosimetric parameters were also observed in favor of P-VMRT[V30: (20.6±10.4)% vs.(16.4±8.9)%, t=3.822, P=0.02; V40: (14.6±7.5)% vs.(11.88±7.1)%, t=3.096, P=0.009; Dmean: (1 442.9±651.2)cGy vs.(1 263.5±605.6)cGy, t=3.986, P=0.02], and there were no statistically significant differences in lung V20, V30 and spinal cord Dmax between the two groups(all P>0.05). Conclusion VMAT is an effective treatment for stage T3 lung cancer patients.The primary advantage of P-VMAT was the reduction in low dose area and decreased risk of symptomatic radioactive lung injury.It may be a priority for pulmonary malignancy patients with the large planning target volume. Key words: Lung neoplasms; Radiotherapy; Radiotherapy, intensity-modulated; Radiometry; Radiotherapy dosage; Radiation injuries; Organs at risk; Comparative study