Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Air Canada 747 Fleet Retirement?  
User currently offlineCessna172RG From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 749 posts, RR: 0
Posted (10 years 5 months 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 7721 times:

I attempted a search with not much of a result...

And forgive me, before anyone says "read more topics and don't be so ignorant!" but...

Question Number One:

Is it true that Air Canada will be getting rid of all of its 747s?

Question Number Two:

What aircraft will serve the YVR-NRT route in the future? (Aside for the daily 767-300 that comes from Eastern Canada [forgot the city name] that stops in Vancouver, only to continue to Tokyo)

Question Number Three:

What will replace these birds? I've heard rumors of DC-10s covering their Combi cargo capacity, however, what about the passenger loads? Is Air Canada yielding lower loads, thus not requiring the 747 any longer?

That's about it from me for now. Thanks in advance...


Save the whales...for dinner!!!
26 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineLongHauler From Canada, joined Mar 2004, 5155 posts, RR: 43
Reply 1, posted (10 years 5 months 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 7640 times:

Presently there are only 3 B747-400Cs in the fleet. The 4 full passenger B747-400s have been returned to the lessors.

The only routes presently flown by the B747-400Cs are YYZ-LHR-YYZ AC 866/AC857. And twice a day YYZ-AB) (FRA / FRF / EDDF), Germany">FRA-YYZ AC872/AC873 and AC876/AC877.

The last LHR flights will be on September 5 outbound, September 6 inbound.

Frankfurt will continue into the fall, with AC878/AC877 switching to a B767-300 and the last flight scheduled so far, will be AC872/AC873 on October 30/31.

These flights will be replaced by A330-300 to AB) (FRA / FRF / EDDF), Germany">FRA, and a combination of A330s and B767s, up to 5 times a day, YYZ-LHR. It was a decision of fleet rationale, that these aircraft will be eventually replaced by more A340s.

The freight uplift has been contracted out to a third party, All Canada Express. One of their considerations is the DC-10F.



Never gonna grow up, never gonna slow down .... Barefoot Blue Jean Night
User currently offlineLongHauler From Canada, joined Mar 2004, 5155 posts, RR: 43
Reply 2, posted (10 years 5 months 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 7627 times:

Sorry, the answer to your other question is that both YYZ-NRT-YYZ and YVR-NRT-YVR are being flown using A340-300 equipment.


Never gonna grow up, never gonna slow down .... Barefoot Blue Jean Night
User currently offlineCaptaingomes From Canada, joined Feb 2001, 6413 posts, RR: 55
Reply 3, posted (10 years 5 months 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 7495 times:

Just ignore the snobs! LongHauler, as always, provided excellent information which is very much appreciated.


"it's kind of like an Airbus, it's an engineering marvel, but there's no sense of passion" -- J. Clarkson re: Coxster
User currently offlineYyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16365 posts, RR: 56
Reply 4, posted (10 years 5 months 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 7489 times:

There was a plan for 2 of the 7 weekly YVR-NRT flights to be 333 equipment this summer. Not sure if this happened.




Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
User currently offlineSuperfly From Thailand, joined May 2000, 40066 posts, RR: 74
Reply 5, posted (10 years 5 months 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 7363 times:

Who will get these AC 747s after?


Bring back the Concorde
User currently offlineYyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16365 posts, RR: 56
Reply 6, posted (10 years 5 months 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 7220 times:

Who will get these AC 747s after?

No airline identified yet. Likely none soon. These 3 will be hard to place as PW combi's with addl mods dictated by Transport Canada.





Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
User currently offlineHorus From Egypt, joined Feb 2004, 5230 posts, RR: 59
Reply 7, posted (10 years 5 months 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 7189 times:

Wouldn't ordering further A346s make more sence in the long run?


EGYPT: A 7,000 Year Old Civilisation
User currently offlineLongHauler From Canada, joined Mar 2004, 5155 posts, RR: 43
Reply 8, posted (10 years 5 months 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 7126 times:

Air Canada presently holds orders/options on A340-500s and A340-600s. Whether we actually see them is up for speculation. It would make sense to me ... but no one in Management asked me!  Smile

On another note with regard to speculation. I entered pilot Briefing last week, and on a notice board was a HUGE picture of an Air Canada Boeing 7E7. Of course, computer generated, but it was a Boeing picture, so I guess the big boys in Seattle are making a pitch to the big boys in Montreal!

When I queried a supervisor, his only response was that this is an Airbus airline, and as we can only dream, they don't call it a DreamLiner for nothing! Oh well ...



Never gonna grow up, never gonna slow down .... Barefoot Blue Jean Night
User currently offlineYyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16365 posts, RR: 56
Reply 9, posted (10 years 5 months 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 6921 times:

Well, the 332 makes much more sense to AC than the 7E7 since they already have the 333/345.




Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
User currently offlineBa97 From Canada, joined Apr 2004, 377 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (10 years 5 months 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 6812 times:

I thought I heard that the 747s were not just re-enforced for cargo but had modifications for military lift under an agreement with the Government of Canada. Something I guess about conversion from passenger to troop and equipment. It is all this that makes the planes overly heavy or costly to operate and thus not attractive due to the glut of old planes out there. Does this ring right?


there is economy class, business class, first class...then Concorde..pure class
User currently offlineCPDC10-30 From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2000, 4810 posts, RR: 23
Reply 11, posted (10 years 5 months 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 6740 times:

but had modifications for military lift under an agreement with the Government of Canada

I wish this was true but it is the first I have ever heard of it. The CF have had to use foreign contractors several times for airlift - haven't heard of them using AC.


User currently offlineYyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16365 posts, RR: 56
Reply 12, posted (10 years 5 months 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 6721 times:

Whatever the mods, 3 early model PW -400 combis will be hard to place.




Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
User currently offlineB747-437B From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (10 years 5 months 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 6700 times:

3 early model PW -400 combis will be hard to place

Don't be so sure. The SCD mods makes them easier converts to all-cargo than a base model, so there is definitely a market for them.


User currently offlineDonder10 From Canada, joined Oct 2001, 6660 posts, RR: 21
Reply 14, posted (10 years 5 months 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 6566 times:

Don't be so sure. The SCD mods makes them easier converts to all-cargo than a base model, so there is definitely a market for them.


Interesting.At the rate it's growing a certain turquoise airline in Asia might end up with them.


User currently offlineYyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16365 posts, RR: 56
Reply 15, posted (10 years 5 months 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 6485 times:

The SCD mods makes them easier converts to all-cargo than a base model

That's true of course.



Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
User currently offlineOlympus69 From Canada, joined Jun 2002, 1737 posts, RR: 7
Reply 16, posted (10 years 5 months 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 6280 times:

I think 2 of the 3 744Ms are leased from GECAS. Is that right?

User currently offlineYyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16365 posts, RR: 56
Reply 17, posted (10 years 5 months 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 6230 times:

I think 2 of the 3 744Ms are leased from GECAS. Is that right?

Correct. According to JP, tails 341 & 343 are leased. 342 appears to be owned.





Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
User currently offlineNa From Germany, joined Dec 1999, 10817 posts, RR: 9
Reply 18, posted (10 years 5 months 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 6078 times:

What is the current state of the 4 ex-Canadian GE-powered 744s taken out of service last year?
One went to Philippines, one is flying for Aerolineas Argentinas, and that carrier wants more 744s. The other 2 seem to be jobless at the moment.


User currently offlineBmacleod From Canada, joined Aug 2001, 2377 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (10 years 5 months 3 days ago) and read 5979 times:

but had modifications for military lift under an agreement with the Government of Canada.

Can't these modifications be undone to allow the AC 744M to become more marketable?



The engine is the heart of an airplane, but the pilot is its soul.
User currently offlinePilatusguy From Switzerland, joined Jan 2004, 315 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (10 years 5 months 3 days ago) and read 5933 times:

Talking about AC's fleet:

Are there any plans at AC to get rid of the 767 for the longhaul routes? AC currently serves ZRH with the 767 which - amongst many of my business colleagues - is a reason for not taking the direct flight to YYZ but rather connect through AB) (FRA / FRF / EDDF), Germany">FRA on the new LH346...

sorry if slightly off topic  Smile


User currently offlineLongHauler From Canada, joined Mar 2004, 5155 posts, RR: 43
Reply 21, posted (10 years 5 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 5874 times:

Air Canada's B744C's have a very unusual history ...

They were originally ordered to fly on the then new Toronto/Vancouver-London-Delhi-Singapore route. The L1011-500s currently flying the route did not have sufficient freight capacity, and nothing else in the fleet had the range in extreme weather/temperature conditions.

While Air Canada and Boeing were finalizing the new aircraft, South African Airways lost an aircraft over the Indian Ocean. It was suspected, then later confirmed that an uncontrollable fire in the main deck cargo hold of the B747 Combi was the cause. One of the most effective ways to fight a fire of this sort is to starve it of oxygen, then blow a fire retardant gas into the area. This is how a fire in a lower hold would be fought, it is very effective. As you can imagine, this is not possible in a main deck hold where the air conditioning/pressurization is shared with passengers.

As a result of this accident, Transport Canada was drawing up legislation not allowing main deck cargo/passenger aircraft where this type of fire can not be fought. ie, any Combi aircraft.

Boeing and Air Canada therefore devised an aircraft with a fixed wall between the main deck cargo and passengers. This wall is a part of the airframe, is fire/heat/gas proof. Also the fire detection and suppression equipment and methods of the lower hold is now possible as this main deck hold now had its own controllable methods of air conditioning and pressurization. This was all very heavy, very inefficient and unique to those 3 aircraft ....but safe!

While all this was happening, and in response to the proposed "anti-Combi" legislation, Canadi>n Airlines announced it would suspend all Arctic flying with its Combi B737s. They decided that all passenger or all cargo aircraft would not be viable. First Air also queried how this vital link could be maintained without its own B727-100 combis.

Transport Canada then had to back down, as the government of Canada was not willing to subsidize the Arctic flying and the locals required it. Also, it was pointed out, that no other country's aviation authority was going to outlaw combi's! Instead, far stricter handling methods have been devised for carrying "Dangerous Goods".

But it was too late for Air Canada's B744 Combis. They had already passed a point in construction that could not reverse these unusual characteristics. While some unnecessary equipment was removed, the fixed, thick, heavy wall could not be removed. And if I understand correctly, this mod can not be reversed without a lot of expensive construction.

So, these orphans have remained in the fleet this long. I think if they had been able to sell then easily earlier, then they would have. As I am sure most are aware, the YYZ/YVR-LHR-DEL-SIN route has long been abandoned.



Never gonna grow up, never gonna slow down .... Barefoot Blue Jean Night
User currently offlineYyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16365 posts, RR: 56
Reply 22, posted (10 years 5 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 5807 times:

Thanks for the detailed explanation Longhauler! Could their unique construction inhibit (or prevent) their conversion to F (ie, full freighter) configuration?




Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
User currently offlineLongHauler From Canada, joined Mar 2004, 5155 posts, RR: 43
Reply 23, posted (10 years 5 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 5796 times:

If I understand our engineering people correctly, the wall separating the passengers and cargo can not be removed without a very heavy construction process done at Seattle. The gentleman I was talking to, likened it to KLMs conversion of its B747-200s to B747-200SUDs. Expensive, and very involved, but you'd have to be pretty sure you want the construction done!


Never gonna grow up, never gonna slow down .... Barefoot Blue Jean Night
User currently offlineYyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16365 posts, RR: 56
Reply 24, posted (10 years 5 months 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 5750 times:

Sounds like an F conversion for these 3 oddballs would not be an option.


Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
25 B747-437B : Nothing stops you from using it as a freighter with a seperated bulkhead compartment though. You simply increase the size of the access doors between
26 Yyz717 : True Sean, but you would still end up with 3 oddball freighters with unique loading issues, weight & balance issues (perhaps), reduced volume/mass fle
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Air Canada 747 posted Sun Sep 18 2005 08:06:33 by 744
Air Canada 747-400 Questions posted Thu Feb 17 2005 04:54:52 by BrowntailWhale
Any Info On This Air Canada 747 (linked)? posted Tue Dec 28 2004 13:25:15 by Norm1153
Fate Of Air Canada's 747-433 Combis posted Thu Sep 30 2004 15:29:28 by BeechNut
Air Canada`s 747-233B Combis posted Sat Jul 10 2004 12:08:03 by Na
Air Canada's 747's posted Thu Apr 22 2004 04:19:18 by LEO777
Ex-Air Canada 747-200 Combis posted Mon Feb 23 2004 13:58:46 by Antipodean
Air Canada Boeing 737 Retirement posted Thu Dec 18 2003 08:37:23 by ACB777
Air Canada BAe-146 Retirement posted Mon Jun 9 2003 14:39:44 by Bigphilnyc
Air Canada Regional Fleet & Operations For Sale posted Mon Mar 11 2002 00:00:26 by Connector4you