Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
FI: A300-600 Freighter May Get Reprieve  
User currently offlineLeelaw From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 8599 times:

Flight International 12/12/06:

"Airbus Rethinks Move To Axe A300-600 Freighter"

According to the article the manufacturer is in preliminary talks with suppliers to reverse the plan to close the A300 production line in mid-2007 because of increasing demand for freighters and continuing indecision over the launch of the A330-200F.

...[Tom] Williams [V.P. programmes at Airbus] says that there have been "some people knocking on the door" for potential A300 orders...[and] that Airbus has "booked memorandums of understandings" with customers for the initial A330-200[F] positions it is offering at the end of 2009, and "has reserved a block of A330 production capacity" after that. But despite demand for the new freighter, Airbus has balked at formally launching the A330-200F and taking firm orders for it.

Sources say this may be because the A330 passenger model's replacement -the A350- will enter service several years later than planned when the A330-200F was first touted. The airframer wants to ensure it does not restrict supply of the passenger A3330s as it bridges the gap to the A350's introduction.


Sorry for all the edits.

[Edited 2006-12-11 10:03:24]

[Edited 2006-12-11 10:04:58]

[Edited 2006-12-11 10:07:08]

[Edited 2006-12-11 10:13:31]

49 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineScouseflyer From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2006, 3386 posts, RR: 9
Reply 1, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 8561 times:

If they're talking like this - someone must be trying to order some more....

User currently offlineBrenintw From Taiwan, joined Jul 2006, 1628 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 8541 times:

Quoting Scouseflyer (Reply 1):
someone must be trying to order some more..

Or convert A380F orders ...



I'm tired of the A vs. B sniping. Neither make planes that shed wings randomly!
User currently offlineFlying-Tiger From Germany, joined Aug 1999, 4161 posts, RR: 36
Reply 3, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 8544 times:

Might be quite a good move. Jade Cargo was said to be quite interested into the A306F for their regional freighter demand, Ethiopian Cargo was said to be quite disappointed that the A306F was axed. Might be quite some potential out there.

Question is OTOH if they are able to get production restarted. Would however assume that this shouldn´t be such a big challenge as the line is still operating and not yet closed down.

Would be a very good financial impact for Airbus - the complete line is paid off, and everything above variable costs is basically profit for them.

So, whom can we put on the "possible customer" list?

- Jade Cargo
- Ethiopian
- Ethiad Crystal Cargo (?)
- Qatar Cargo (?)
- Air Hong Kong (?)



Flown: A319/320/321,A332/3,A380,AT4,AT7,B732/3/4/5/7/8,B742/4,B762/763,B772,CR2,CR7,ER4,E70,E75,F50/70,M11,L15,S20
User currently offlineScouseflyer From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2006, 3386 posts, RR: 9
Reply 4, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 8481 times:

Quoting Brenintw (Reply 2):

Or convert A380F orders ...

Never thought of that one....

As far as restarting the line - I wonder if they don't need to demolish the hanger that the A300 is built in just yet (A350 coming in 2013 not 2010) then there's not the pressure there.


User currently offlineBrenintw From Taiwan, joined Jul 2006, 1628 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 8458 times:

Continuing the A300F will also take the pressure off for making a decision on the A332F -- developing the A332F will absorb cash that Airbus doesn't necessarily have floating around at the moment, or would prefer to throw at the A350. I'm sure cargo doesn't have quite the same fetish for the latest shiny hardware that pax do.


I'm tired of the A vs. B sniping. Neither make planes that shed wings randomly!
User currently offlineScouseflyer From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2006, 3386 posts, RR: 9
Reply 6, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 8447 times:

Quoting Brenintw (Reply 5):
I'm sure cargo doesn't have quite the same fetish for the latest shiny hardware that pax do.

Or the profit margin on planes!


User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12134 posts, RR: 51
Reply 7, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 8359 times:

Quoting Brenintw (Reply 2):
Quoting Scouseflyer (Reply 1):
someone must be trying to order some more..

Or convert A380F orders ...

UPS?


User currently offlineBrightCedars From Belgium, joined Nov 2004, 1288 posts, RR: 2
Reply 8, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 8323 times:

There are still a nice number of A300-600Rs flying around the world and they could probably most be converted into freighters. I don't see a huge market for new builds.


I want the European Union flag on airliners.net!
User currently offlineScouseflyer From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2006, 3386 posts, RR: 9
Reply 9, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 8285 times:

Quoting BrightCedars (Reply 8):
There are still a nice number of A300-600Rs flying around the world and they could probably most be converted into freighters. I don't see a huge market for new builds.

If people will pay for them and if you can build them and you can make a profit - then there's a market


User currently offlineWINGS From Portugal, joined May 2005, 2831 posts, RR: 68
Reply 10, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 8223 times:

Well I have to admit that this latest development was really unexpected. If Airbus feels that the A300F still has potential in the market, I see no reason why they should not continue with the line.

According to my numbers Airbus has the following orders for the A300/310 family:

A300 561 (555 delivered)
A310 255 (all delivered)

* 5x A310 for Iraqi Airways still show up on the order list. (A310 production has officially been terminated)

Total: 816


It seems that Airbus are not yet ready to let go of the their first born child  Smile

Regards,
Wings



Aviation Is A Passion.
User currently offlineBreiz From France, joined Mar 2005, 1917 posts, RR: 2
Reply 11, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 8215 times:

Quoting Flying-Tiger (Reply 3):
So, whom can we put on the "possible customer" list?

FEDEX.
They cancelled their remaining 25 or so A300F order when ordering the A380s.
Now that the A380 order is down the drain, maybe the A300Fs will be considered again?


User currently offlinePADSpot From Germany, joined Jan 2005, 1676 posts, RR: 5
Reply 12, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 8174 times:

With the AB6-line further open, it could also open the door for a potential updated AB6 pax-version (new engines, winglets, aerodynamic tweaking and a new cabin) which could easily compete with the B783 as it is being 15 tons lighter ... with a low break-even point (and thus low development costs) of, let's say, 50 frames it could be worthwhile. They are quite a few airlines who are directly oder indirectly asking for an alternative to the B783. LH leading the way ...

User currently offlineManni From South Korea, joined Nov 2001, 4221 posts, RR: 23
Reply 13, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 8078 times:

Quoting Flying-Tiger (Reply 3):
So, whom can we put on the "possible customer" list?

- Jade Cargo
- Ethiopian
- Ethiad Crystal Cargo (?)
- Qatar Cargo (?)
- Air Hong Kong (?)

Galaxy Airlines of Japan recently took delivery of their first new build freighter. Apart from a converted A300 they have no other aircraft in their fleet and no other outstanding orders. Perhaps them?



SUPPORT THE LEBANESE CIVILIANS
User currently offlineColumba From Germany, joined Dec 2004, 7062 posts, RR: 4
Reply 14, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 7993 times:

Quoting PADSpot (Reply 12):
With the AB6-line further open, it could also open the door for a potential updated AB6 pax-version (new engines, winglets, aerodynamic tweaking and a new cabin) which could easily compete with the B783 as it is being 15 tons lighter ... with a low break-even point (and thus low development costs) of, let's say, 50 frames it could be worthwhile. They are quite a few airlines who are directly oder indirectly asking for an alternative to the B783. LH leading the way ...

An updated A300 passenger version would not fit anymore in Airbus family concept since it would not share any commonality with the rest of the product line.



It will forever be a McDonnell Douglas MD 80 , Boeing MD 80 sounds so wrong
User currently offlineTrex8 From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 4745 posts, RR: 14
Reply 15, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 7952 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Brenintw (Reply 5):
developing the A332F will absorb cash that Airbus doesn't necessarily have floating around at the moment, or would prefer to throw at the A350.

how much could it possibly cost them when non OEMs regularly come up with pax to cargo conversions? plus they have put in a lot of work into the tankers already for the RAF and RAAF. one other reason they may be sitting on the fence for a A332F is deciding whether to re engine them.


User currently offlineBeaucaire From Syria, joined Sep 2003, 5252 posts, RR: 25
Reply 16, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 7942 times:

Quoting Breiz (Reply 11):
FEDEX.
They cancelled their remaining 25 or so A300F order when ordering the A380s.
Now that the A380 order is down the drain, maybe the A300Fs will be considered again?

But it is my understanding FEDEX might (?) re-order the A380's again....
Some interesting statements from Fedex Chairman recently make things look like a balance-sheet retreat from the A380 orders.



Please respect animals - don't eat them...
User currently offlineBrendows From Norway, joined Apr 2006, 1020 posts, RR: 4
Reply 17, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 7930 times:

Quoting Flying-Tiger (Reply 3):
So, whom can we put on the "possible customer" list?

- Jade Cargo

Jade Cargo planned to operate the A300 on regional routes, but was banned from wet-leasing A300s by the Chinese authorities, so I wouldn't put them on this list no 


User currently offlineWINGS From Portugal, joined May 2005, 2831 posts, RR: 68
Reply 18, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 7874 times:

Quoting PADSpot (Reply 12):
With the AB6-line further open, it could also open the door for a potential updated AB6 pax-version (new engines, winglets, aerodynamic tweaking and a new cabin) which could easily compete with the B783 as it is being 15 tons lighter ... with a low break-even point (and thus low development costs) of, let's say, 50 frames it could be worthwhile. They are quite a few airlines who are directly order indirectly asking for an alternative to the B783. LH leading the way ...

Well you bring up an interesting point. The A300 fuselage still has great potential.

Quoting Manni (Reply 13):

Galaxy Airlines of Japan recently took delivery of their first new build freighter. Apart from a converted A300 they have no other aircraft in their fleet and no other outstanding orders. Perhaps them?

I always found it strange that they operate so few. I still would expect FedEx and UPS, TNT as the most likely.

Quoting Columba (Reply 14):
An updated A300 passenger version would not fit anymore in Airbus family concept since it would not share any commonality with the rest of the product line.

Why wouldn't it fit? Commonality didn't stop TAM acquiring the B77W, or LH form acquiring the B748i

Quoting Beaucaire (Reply 16):
But it is my understanding FEDEX might (?) re-order the A380's again....
Some interesting statements from FedEx Chairman recently make things look like a balance-sheet retreat from the A380 orders.

FedEx had to make a choice, B772F or A388F. They currently don't have the cash to order both.

I still expect to see FedEx re-order the A388F in the future. It is a perfect fit for it's needs. By the time the A388F becomes available Airbus may have also incorporated further improvements and engines, which would make the A338F even more attractive.

Regards,
Wings



Aviation Is A Passion.
User currently offlinePADSpot From Germany, joined Jan 2005, 1676 posts, RR: 5
Reply 19, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 7791 times:

Quoting Columba (Reply 14):
An updated A300 passenger version would not fit anymore in Airbus family concept since it would not share any commonality with the rest of the product line.

May I quote myself?

Quoting PADSpot (Reply 12):
(new engines, winglets, aerodynamic tweaking and a new cabin)

new engines = taken from A332 or A358 if already available
winglets/wingtip-fences = taken from A330/A340/A380 or even w/o any for extreme shorthauls (with LH in mind)
aerodynamic tweaking = wherever it may improve economics (but not changing larger structures)
cockpit = taken from A350/A330/A340 (same type-rating?)
cabin = taken from A330/A340/A350

Furthermore same fuselage diameter as A330/340, better cargo capabilities, far cheaper than the B783. The ideal airplane for large developing markets like India or China.

Commonality with the remaining product line wouldn't be an issue. It's money that counts. The B783 is a fake (B788 w/o wingtips) and fat package (105+tons). You wouldn't even need the latest engines (GenX) to make it a better plane than the B783. Roughly 15tons difference in OEW will make up for it ... if they can build such an aircraft for a couple of 100M€ in development costs it will pay out ...

The 737 has been updated three times, the 747 now get its third update. There is still life in the A300 and has also deserved its third update. Its also the youngest design of those three.


User currently offlineMusapapaya From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2004, 1086 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 7506 times:

Quoting PADSpot (Reply 19):
new engines = taken from A332 or A358 if already available
winglets/wingtip-fences = taken from A330/A340/A380 or even w/o any for extreme shorthauls (with LH in mind)
aerodynamic tweaking = wherever it may improve economics (but not changing larger structures)
cockpit = taken from A350/A330/A340 (same type-rating?)
cabin = taken from A330/A340/A350

Furthermore same fuselage diameter as A330/340, better cargo capabilities, far cheaper than the B783. The ideal airplane for large developing markets like India or China.

Commonality with the remaining product line wouldn't be an issue. It's money that counts. The B783 is a fake (B788 w/o wingtips) and fat package (105+tons). You wouldn't even need the latest engines (GenX) to make it a better plane than the B783. Roughly 15tons difference in OEW will make up for it ... if they can build such an aircraft for a couple of 100M€ in development costs it will pay out ...

The 737 has been updated three times, the 747 now get its third update. There is still life in the A300 and has also deserved its third update. Its also the youngest design of those three.

Generally I love your idea - I think the A300 series is still worthwhile to be kept. At least it is a great aircraft to fly. If it is 100 tonnes lighter than the 783, then I also see its future.

I hope airbus can consider this too.



Lufthansa Group of Airlines
User currently offlineLeelaw From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 7226 times:

The full text of the FI summarized in the threadstarter is now available online:

http://www.flightglobal.com/Articles...ing+demands+for+cargo+variant.html


User currently offlineColumba From Germany, joined Dec 2004, 7062 posts, RR: 4
Reply 22, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 7193 times:

Quoting PADSpot (Reply 19):
Quoting PADSpot (Reply 12):
(new engines, winglets, aerodynamic tweaking and a new cabin)

new engines = taken from A332 or A358 if already available
winglets/wingtip-fences = taken from A330/A340/A380 or even w/o any for extreme shorthauls (with LH in mind)
aerodynamic tweaking = wherever it may improve economics (but not changing larger structures)
cockpit = taken from A350/A330/A340 (same type-rating?)
cabin = taken from A330/A340/A350

But still no fly by wire and no A320/A330 styled cockpit. A320/A330 crews would not be able to fly this aircraft. Maybe LH order this aircraft with the improvements mentioned by you since they already have trained A300 crews. But that would be less than 15 aircraft as they don´t want to replace their A300 1:1 as they have stated that they don´t plan to do so.
What other A306 operator would buy this plane and would it justify the development costs ? I don´t think so.



It will forever be a McDonnell Douglas MD 80 , Boeing MD 80 sounds so wrong
User currently offlineDEVILFISH From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 4798 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 7144 times:

Quoting Trex8 (Reply 15):
plus they have put in a lot of work into the tankers already for the RAF and RAAF.

Expressions of freighter interests aside, a long shot might be the USAF RFP's phased requirement for a smaller initial tanker.



"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
User currently offlineClickhappy From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 9623 posts, RR: 68
Reply 24, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 7087 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

The A300-600R is not 100 tonnes lighter than the (proposed weight) of the 783.

I think you will find the number to be closer to 12 tonnes, and the 783 holds 30 more pax.


25 MIAMIx707 : Besides the A380 and A343 the 300 is the Airbus I like the most. I'd love to see more A300s being ordered. Good news if Airbus finds more customers fo
26 Ncelhr : Couldn't Airbus do what MD/Boeing did with the DC10's converting them to MD10s?
27 FlyingColours : Yes but Airbus did convert one to FBW a long time ago (FBW controls on one side with the yoke on the skippers side). A lot of instruments can be conv
28 Columba : still no fly by wire and sidesticks....
29 EI321 : Question - Could Airbus possibly: 1. Put the A330 cockpit into the A300? 2. Create an A300-A332 hybrid (basically an A332 cockpit, interior but with A
30 Irobertson : It was my impression that the A330/340 was a development of the same fuselage design as the A300/310 and that the major changes were wings, engines,
31 EI321 : Part of the problem would be implementing all of those changes together, for instance the wings on the A330 and A300 are different, as are most of th
32 FlyDreamliner : Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the A330, with its significantly larger, more modern wings have a larger lifting ability than the A300, despite b
33 ComeAndGo : … and has more fuel efficient engines.
34 PADSpot : I think for short-haul and regional business the 280pax that the A300 can (easily!) carry are already way enough for 90% of the potential customers.
35 Jonathan-l : It was an expensive move for the airlines that selected this option. In the case of the A300, you don't even get the advantage of not needing a 3rd p
36 A342 : Way too big. Now I agree, the GEnX engine for the 748 would suit an "A300NG".
37 Barbarian : Both UPS and Fedex expressed an interest in ordering a not insignificant number of aircraft. Would imagine that as long as industrially Airbus could
38 Breiz : That's correct for the B2 and B4 early version. The B4-600 has a two-crew cockpit.
39 EI321 : Well its only the 600 thats being proposed here.
40 Leelaw : It seems odd that UPS would have any interest in acquiring additional new-build A306Fs when they converted outstanding orders for 37 of the type to 1
41 Brenintw : Does it Leelaw? Sitting on the outside, and not being privvy to any gossip other than what I read here on a.net, it makes a lot of sense to me. The A
42 RJ111 : I also think updating the A300 would be a great idea. It's a very lightweight aircraft, and although MTOW and range aren't great i feel a slight impr
43 Post contains images Leelaw : I'm not fathoming how that particular scenario is at all face saving for UPS, seems to me it makes them look like Airbus has them on a very short lea
44 Barbarian : Haven't UPS just bought out another carrier? Honestly dont think it has anything to do with the A380 delays as such, just taking advantage of Airbus'
45 Brenintw : They've both got each other in a choke-hold -- UPS wants its money back, and doesn't really want the A380F, Airbus doesn't want to give UPS its money
46 Flying-Tiger : Just for the records: Air Cargo World lists MAS Kargo as being unable to lease A300 freighters due to unavailability. Makes one think if there is any
47 Zeke : I think this would be possible, and I could suggest that maybe the upgraded A300 line come a combined A300/330/340 line sharing the same fuselage cro
48 Bennett123 : I suspect that the main market could be existing A300B operator trading up to A300-600 or people who need capacity quickly.
49 Cf6ppe : There are several factors that could possibly keep the A300-600F line open: 1) tight market for used A300-600 pax hulls available to convert to freigh
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...
AI Should Get A300-600's posted Wed May 28 2003 07:31:37 by Indianguy
Regions Air May Get Bought Out... posted Sun Nov 19 2006 07:26:56 by ERAUgrad02
Retirement Of Lufthansa A300-600? posted Thu Nov 2 2006 18:59:55 by FlightLover
Will TG Ever Replce Its A300-600's? posted Tue Oct 17 2006 16:30:12 by ThaiA345
Airbus A300-600 Lufthansa To Cyprus posted Mon Aug 7 2006 23:42:02 by Reifel
Airbus May Get Respite At Farnborough posted Thu Jul 13 2006 13:09:21 by Manni
N173UP>>>A300-600 posted Thu Jun 22 2006 14:50:12 by ChrisNH
AA A300-600 posted Wed May 31 2006 03:45:49 by ATLAaron
A310, A300-600 (MD-11) - Old Airplanes? posted Fri May 5 2006 08:33:07 by LukasMako
AA's Airbus A300-600's posted Tue Apr 25 2006 21:12:34 by AirbusA346