PITrules From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 3290 posts, RR: 6 Posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 4 days ago) and read 11382 times:
From the June issue of Air Cargo World, on the subject of Northwest replacing their older 742 freighters:
"Northwest is considering such options as the A-380 freighter that first reaches the market in 2008, the 777 freighter that is slated for launch that year, 747-400 conversions to freighters from current passenger service as well as -400 production freighters, plus the 747-8 that reaches its first airline customer late in 2009. Industry sources say the 747-8 is the most likely candidate to fit into Northwest's Asia focused cargo network."
7E72004 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 3587 posts, RR: 2
Reply 2, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 4 days ago) and read 11324 times:
I would think one of the Boeing jets would be preferred. I am not trying to start an "A vs. B" thing but the 747 or 777 would be the more logical ones since the A380 may have trouble at some airports where NW has cargo service.
The next generation of aircraft is just around the corner!
NWDC10 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 4 days ago) and read 11239 times:
I believe in the future, NW will order the 747-8 and when they retire their 747-400's they will just turn them into Cargo Freightors. Why would they buy a brand new a/c for cargo operations when they can buy brand new a/c for passengers and use their "retired" 747-400's for cargo operations.Robert NWDC10
TokyoNarita From Palau, joined Aug 2003, 570 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 4 days ago) and read 11132 times:
Realistically, NW will go looking for used B747-400s to convert them to freighters to replace their classics. They may even convert their own as more A330s and B787s may become available. A lot of successful asian carriers will soon be looking to get rid of their B744s pretty soon for more efficient twins. I would say there will be plenty of B744s available for cargo conversions for a while at a reasonable price.
FWAERJ From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 3857 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 11011 times:
Quoting NWDC10 (Reply 3): I believe in the future, NW will order the 747-8 and when they retire their 747-400's they will just turn them into Cargo Freightors. Why would they buy a brand new a/c for cargo operations when they can buy brand new a/c for passengers and use their "retired" 747-400's for cargo operations.
I, too, see NW converting its pax 747-400s to freighters. OTOH, I see NW as more of a 777-300ER customer than a 747-8I customer. Remember, NW wants to right-size its Asian capacity, not increase it.
"Did he really need the triple bypass? Or was it the miles?"
BlueSky1976 From Poland, joined Jul 2004, 1921 posts, RR: 4
Reply 8, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 10847 times:
First, NW would have to straighten out their Ch. 11 problem, then order new planes. But when they are ready to order, I'd say they'd go for 747-8i. As much as I'd rather see them ordering 777-300ER, with 748i they can use their existing maintenance and crews, so it would be more of an airframe-only investment instead of airframe + infrastructure + maintenance + training one.
Now get your f***ing Jumbo Jet off my airport!!! - AC/DC "Ain't No Fun To Be a Millionaire"
Adipasqu From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 238 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 10730 times:
Quoting PITrules (Thread starter): Industry sources say the 747-8 is the most likely candidate to fit into Northwest's Asia focused cargo network.
Am I the only one here that thinks NW's DC-9 fleet would make excellent conversions to DC-9C's in 40 or so years when NW finally starts to phase 'em out? Who needs new 748's when you could have 20 old DC9's do the same thing? (just in case you couldn't tell, my tongue is firmly planted in my cheek)
AirRyan From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2532 posts, RR: 5
Reply 11, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 10656 times:
They are only seriously considered in the 747 advanced and will only use the others as a bargaining tool. I used to work down the hall from Steenlands office, right on the corner of domestic pricing and atlantic revenue management where so many evidently including some VP's would stop and congreate for numerous annoying (and sometimes informative) discussions. Suffice to say if they had the money they already would have ordered the 747 ADV and who knows, they may still be the launch customer for the passenger version, at least perhaps the US if nonetheless. NW definately sees the 748 as the perfect replacement for their 742's.
TokyoNarita From Palau, joined Aug 2003, 570 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 10610 times:
Quote: Another is that the 747-400BCF doesn't have the same uplift as a -400F.
This is a good point, and I think it depends on whether if NW wants to keep the ANC cargo ops or the benefits of bypassing ANC. NCA and JAL both have picked up the 400Fs and now they are launching non-stops from NRT to Europe with almost full load.
FlyDreamliner From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 2759 posts, RR: 15
Reply 18, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 7999 times:
Quoting NWDC10 (Reply 3): I believe in the future, NW will order the 747-8 and when they retire their 747-400's they will just turn them into Cargo Freightors. Why would they buy a brand new a/c for cargo operations when they can buy brand new a/c for passengers and use their "retired" 747-400's for cargo operations.Robert NWDC10
NW has a few routes that support a full 744 on the pacific, but they are trying to expand to more American cities from their NRT hub, which means 787s pick up the slack, and there is less use for 747s. NW increasingly doesn't need the big jets as much. They'll always have a 747 fleet for their heavy pacific routes (NRT-MSP, NRT-DTW etc.), but don't expect it to grow greatly. Plus, 748 means NEW jets - and those cost money.
Quoting Starrion (Reply 4): I think NWDC10 hit the nail on the head. That makes the most sense by far.
Anyone who knows NW know - what makes the most sense has almost nothing to do with what NW does most of the time.
Quoting Seamefly (Reply 9): Would these purchases require another 195 millions pay cuts from the FA group?
Hahaha, they FA union already voted down the current paycut contract, they are the lowest paid FA's around, or atleast on any legacy. Don't count on it. There isn't much left in the way of pay to cut.
"Let the world change you, and you can change the world"
Wjcandee From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5404 posts, RR: 22
Reply 19, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 7662 times:
Quoting Gigneil (Reply 6): Quoting NWDC10 (Reply 3):
Why would they buy a brand new a/c for cargo operations when they can buy brand new a/c for passengers and use their "retired" 747-400's for cargo operations.
There are a variety of reasons.
One is the nose door.
Another is that the 747-400BCF doesn't have the same uplift as a -400F.
Another is that 747-400s aren't just lying around.
Gigneil is of course correct. There's a good article from about 18 months ago that runs down which suppliers are doing what, that's pretty true today except that the big 757-conversion push hasn't yet happened; the demand is there but the supply isn't because of the renaissance that the 757 is enjoying in passenger service. http://www.atwonline.com/magazine/article.html?articleID=1082
Let me suggest two more issues:
(1) Availability of conversion slots, which Boeing has some control over by licensing additional contractors for conversion kits (like those kits Korean will ultimately use to convert some of its own 747-400s and maybe those of other carriers), but the ability to get "quick" conversions is limited, with many lines sold out for a few years.
(2) New vs used: Cargo is flown in two (essentially two, anyway) modes: high-utilization and low-utilization. On certain routes, carrying certain cargo, you're getting major-passenger-airline-like daily utilization of your assets. Under those circumstances, the higher capital cost of an all-new-aircraft acquistion pays off in the additional efficiencies or capabilities of the design, as well as typically-higher dispatch reliability and time between failures. On other routes, you're taking the thing, flying it to the hub with the night's business, sorting, reloading, and going back to the origin, and maybe you're doing that twice a day if you're lucky. The aircraft get to sit a lot. You can spend some time working on them while they're sitting without impacting schedules. Under those circumstances, the lower efficiency of the airframe is offset by lower capital cost of the airframe. With today's very-high fuel prices, the analysis changes a little, but it's still the basic tradeoff. So for most of the major "scheduled" cargo carriers, a mixed fleet is optimal. Newer aircraft that they're going to fly the crap out of, and older aircraft that will get to do some sitting around. UPS's fleet isn't a bad example of this. In the US, recent rumours are that DHL's two favorite aircraft are the 762 (which burns less fuel than a 727 and has a 2-person flight deck and one less engine, and carries basically the same load as a DC8 with two less engines and a 2-person flight deck on a lot less fuel) and the DC9. Interestingly, the aircraft that has the best dispatch reliability of all DHL US aircraft is the DC9. Flying 2 r/ts a day to the west coast, the 767s see very decent utilization, while the DC9s see significantly less. And each is well-suited to its mission.
NLINK From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 313 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 6351 times:
One interesting rumor that has been around is Airbus and PW offering NW a very good deal to launch the 330F, which would still work using ANC as a hub but I believe this aircraft is to small in my opinion.
ChiGB1973 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 1622 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 5612 times:
I just wonder how you can consider all three as an and/or situation. Really, if you need an A-380, you need, what 2 or 3 777s. Since NW as the Asia cargo traffic, then the A-380 would be appropriate.
I do have to wonder what effect FedEx and UPS getting A-380s will have on NWs operation. Is NW hauling their cargo now that they will not be hauling in the future for these companies? I know NW has regular flights to ILN, but DHL has no intentions of getting the A-380 nor anything bigger than they have.
I tend to agree that passenger aircraft should take priority. How bad does NW need a nose loading aircraft. Maybe easier loading/unloading, but aside from huge cargo, the containers and nets side loaded would probably work fine. Not to discount the need for large air freight, but I am leaning towards converting what they have to freighters.