Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
A380F Has Highest Market Potential  
User currently offlineJustloveplanes From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 1045 posts, RR: 1
Posted (9 years 8 months 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 5021 times:

When all is said and done, I think the A380 will have the most success as a freighter. It will be successful to some degree as a people hauler, but as a freighter, it seems bound to do real.y well. So many Freight ops seem to be hub to hub internationally.

19 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (9 years 8 months 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 4950 times:

...that's probably why for the longest time Airbus couldn't attract more than a single customer  Big grin



Don't get me wrong, I think it'll do well in many respects as a freighter; but I certainly don't it expect it to turn out to be the driving force behind that aircraft's sales... in its earlier days anyways.

Later in its service-life, you'll see freighter usage pick up (similar to the 747), particularly if a conversion kit is offered.


User currently offlinePhilsquares From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (9 years 8 months 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 4810 times:

I disagree. I think it will be in the same league as the MD-11.

The 380F has two problems. First the floor loading is restricted to 7.9Lbs/sqin. While the 747 is stressed to 9lbs/sq in. So in terms of heavy cargo the 747 is more capable. For package hauling, where you normally become volume limited, I think the 380 will do OK.

The second problem is the lack of a nose door. So, now you have limited yourself to loads that can fit through the side door. Again, for a Fed Ex/UPS type of operation, I think it will do fine.

If I remember correctly, the 380 only has a 25-30 ton increase in payload over the 747.


User currently offlineMD11Engineer From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 13985 posts, RR: 62
Reply 3, posted (9 years 8 months 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 4713 times:

I´ve heard that UPS is considering the A380F, but doesn´twant to be the launch customer, due to possible teething problems. AFAIK, the decision might fall in 2008. The same applies AFAIK, to TNT and DHL.
When they decide to buy the A380F freighter, they want to makesure that the operation willrun smoothly and that the economics of the plane will be met.

Jan


User currently offlineDynkrisolo From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 1862 posts, RR: 7
Reply 4, posted (9 years 8 months 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 4649 times:

ConcordeBoy:


that's probably why for the longest time Airbus couldn't attract more than a single customer


They have two customers. Of Emirates' 45 A380s, at least two will be freighters.

Philsquares:

Yes. The 380 is ideal for express forwarders like FedEx and UPS. It is not a good general purpose cargo hauler.


I disagree. I think it will be in the same league as the MD-11


The above statement is somewhat contradictory to the rest of your message. The MD-11F was a good seller. 59 of the total 200 MD-11 orders were for the freighter model. In comparison, 126 of the total 661 744 orders were for the freighter model. 29.5% for the MD-11 vs 19% for the 744.


If I remember correctly, the 380 only has a 25-30 ton increase in payload over the 747.


112t vs 150t


User currently offlineBlackKnight From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 241 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (9 years 8 months 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 4638 times:

It depends on the market. If planes continue to be designed with larger and larger cargo holds and the market shifts from point to point. Whom would be less expensive to ship packages? A airline using the hub additional handling system or direct/semi direct. Remember time is key in premium packages.


BK
User currently offlineRayChuang From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 8002 posts, RR: 5
Reply 6, posted (9 years 8 months 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 4568 times:

I think right now the various cargo airlines are going to watch how well FedEx likes their A380-800F's. If it does work well, don't be surprised that UPS and DHL orders the plane, too.

User currently offlinePhilsquares From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (9 years 8 months 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 4521 times:

dynkrisolo

1) I suppose someone should tell Boeing and my company that the payload is 112T. It's actually 121T.

2) My statement about the MD-11 is not contradictory at all. The MD-11 is used as a high volume, low weight platform. There is no nose door, so you are limited to what can fit through the side door. Where as, the 744F can take outsized cargo, such as oil drilling equipment, electrical generators and so on. When the MD-11 was introduced there was a void in the market for that type of aircraft. For operators such as FedEx, who's primary business is small package transport, the 747 was just too big. The payload would never approach the limits thus making the economics for the 744/747 too expensive.

3) Again, the 380F is limited in it's floor loading thus limiting the ability to take outsized cargo. That coupled with the lack of a nose door will severely limit the ability of traditional cargo carriers to take outsized cargo. The outsized cargo is actually a significant portion of the business. It is extremely attractive in terms of revenue.

4) Finally, the market share of the 744F vs. the MD-11 was influenced not by the MD-11 being a better freighter but the fact there were so many 747-200F and Pax aircraft on the market. The pax airframes could be converted to a SF for about US$25million. Therefore, the used aircraft became a very attractive alternative to both the 744F and the MD-11.


User currently offlineGigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 85
Reply 8, posted (9 years 8 months 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 4443 times:

I think that outsize cargo as a whole is overrated on this site as a percentage of worldwide cargo revenue.

Yes, clearly its a valuable market and requires the coverage. But the 747F handles it pretty well, with the help of the Antonovs and the Beluga to a lesser extent.

The market driving force in cargo right now is standard pallet and container shipments (packages and parcels, but also equipment and other heavy machinery that can be palletized). Package freight is something the 747F just isn't great at, because its floor space potential is so much lower than its actual volume.

The M11F has been performing extremely well as a package freighter. LH threw a hissy fit when it was discontinued, and clearly FX and 5X would like more.

N


User currently offlineConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (9 years 8 months 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 4363 times:

They have two customers. Of Emirates' 45 A380s, at least two will be freighters.

well aware of that, hence the statement being written in past tense  Big grin




I think that outsize cargo as a whole is overrated on this site as a percentage of worldwide cargo revenue.

Yes, clearly its a valuable market and requires the coverage. But the 747F handles it pretty well, with the help of the Antonovs and the Beluga to a lesser extent.


Keep in mind that the A380F may have the most difficulty out of the aforementioned for loading such cargo


User currently offlineDynkrisolo From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 1862 posts, RR: 7
Reply 10, posted (9 years 8 months 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 4362 times:

Philsquares:


I suppose someone should tell Boeing and my company that the payload is 112T. It's actually 121T.


At 121t, it will have loading restriction. I believe it's customary to quote the payload without any loading restriction.


When the MD-11 was introduced there was a void in the market for that type of aircraft.
...
The pax airframes could be converted to a SF for about US$25million. Therefore, the used aircraft became a very attractive alternative to both the 744F and the MD-11.


If memory serves, 742SF's payload is only 10t or less more than MD11F's. So, I don't consider the MD-11F filled a void in the market.

Don't get me wrong. I agree with you on most of the things you said. Just some minor details.


User currently offlineGigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 85
Reply 11, posted (9 years 8 months 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 4345 times:

Keep in mind that the A380F may have the most difficulty out of the aforementioned for loading such cargo

Hence, my saying the 747F, Antonovs, and Beluga have the market pretty well covered already.  Laugh out loud

N


User currently offlineStarrion From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 1126 posts, RR: 2
Reply 12, posted (9 years 8 months 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 4309 times:

I think it will still be a significant type for self-loading cargo in hub to hub operations.

But I have a question: Fedex got rid of their 747 types and went with larger numbers of smaller aircraft. Why were they one of the first to order the A388F?



Knowledge Replaces Fear
User currently offlineGigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 85
Reply 13, posted (9 years 8 months 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 4248 times:

If you refer back up, I talked about it a bit.

The 747F has a cavernous volume, but a relatively low ratio of that to floor space. You run out of positions for containers on a 747F very quickly, and then you have a lot of empty air and a lot of extra aircraft.

The A380F is optimized for container space. Its loading density is lower, but you can fill it with many, many more containers than a 747F (I think over twice as many).

N


User currently offlineTVCFlyer From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 47 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (9 years 8 months 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 3699 times:

For all you freighter experts, where does the 777-200LRF fit into the "big picture"?

User currently offlineAlessandro From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (9 years 8 months 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 3579 times:

Depends on the competition, AN-124 is definitly something to take into consideration when comparing the A380. I personally think the A380 will
sell much more passenger or combos than pure freight planes.


User currently offlineDc10guy From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 2685 posts, RR: 6
Reply 16, posted (9 years 8 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 3069 times:

I would agree. I wonder why Airbus doesn't offer a 340-500 or -600 freighter ???


Next time try the old "dirty Sanchez" She'll love it !!!
User currently offlineAirbusCanada From Canada, joined Nov 2004, 326 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (9 years 8 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 3014 times:

Where as, the 744F can take outsized cargo, such as oil drilling equipment, electrical generators and so on. When the MD-11 was introduced there was a void in the market for that type of aircraft. For operators such as FedEx, who's primary business is small package transport, the 747 was just too big. The payload would never approach the limits thus making the economics for the 744/747 too expensive.


Isn't the An-124 is much more popular among outsize cargo operators than the 747F?

if you count volume, small packages are much heavier than you think.
Take an empty computer/TV box, fill it up with paper/books and try to lift it.
it will weight more than your computer/TV.




User currently offlineGigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 85
Reply 18, posted (9 years 8 months 3 days ago) and read 2809 times:

For all you freighter experts, where does the 777-200F fit into the "big picture"?

A great replacement for M11Fs, or a supplement to an M11F fleet.

The MD-11 is a 90ish ton freighter. The 777-200F is a 102t freighter. They have similar floor space and volume. The 777 has a pretty high payload density.

The 772F will also feature a fairly long range, even longer than the M11F's ok range.

N


User currently offlineN685FE From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 451 posts, RR: 11
Reply 19, posted (9 years 8 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 2640 times:

FYI: It is common for us to send out our a/c at max limits, I suppose that 5X would also. The 747's that FX acquired from Flying Tigers were old and very neglected. The market for oversized cargo is covered very well as mentioned by Gigneil.

ConcordeBoy

Keep in mind that the A380F may have the most difficulty out of the aforementioned for loading such cargo

I don't believe that Airbus has any intention for the A380F to be an oversize cargo hauler.



psp. lead by example
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...
JetBlue & ERJ-190s: Smaller Market Potential? posted Tue Sep 20 2005 05:50:55 by SuseJ772
ABX Has Highest Rate Of Pay posted Sun Mar 27 2005 23:43:43 by B741
Market Potential Latin-America posted Fri Nov 14 2003 09:54:47 by Flying-Tiger
DEN Has Highest Load Factor Out Of UA's 5 Hubs. posted Tue Nov 20 2001 18:15:49 by BA
Has Ryanair Overslept Ireland-Poland Market? posted Mon Nov 28 2005 16:15:03 by Danny
Has WAW More Longhaul Potential? posted Thu Nov 3 2005 00:22:12 by LO231
Who Has The Highest Labor Costs (US)? posted Fri Jun 10 2005 17:53:34 by Wobbles
Which Airport Has The Highest Taxes? posted Fri Feb 18 2005 14:33:56 by RootsAir
Has PW Lost It In The Civil Market? posted Fri Jul 16 2004 19:23:51 by ConcordeBoy
Who Has The Biggest Market Share At LAX? posted Fri May 14 2004 00:17:48 by A2