Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
A340 Cargo Conversion  
User currently offlineHeliflyerPDC From Belgium, joined Sep 2006, 128 posts, RR: 0
Posted (7 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 3696 times:

Hay,

According to Flight International.The Israeli company Bedek Aviation Group (a subsidiary of Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI),is preparing for the type certification fr the conversion of older A340 models to cargo aircraft A340 "special freighter".

Flight International

article(in Dutch)

Grtz PDC

(ps: I did a search but nothing turned up, But if it's already posted, please delete my threat)


grtz PDC
15 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineCricket From India, joined Aug 2005, 2967 posts, RR: 7
Reply 1, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 3537 times:

Seems interesting, I wonder if some of the older A340-300's will find a market as freighters! I assume as delivers of more 77W's and A380's start carriers like EK will start retiring their A340's and AF already is!


A300B2/B4/6R, A313, A319/320/321, A333, A343, A388, 737-2/3/4/7/8/9, 747-3/4, 772/2E/2L/3, E170/190, F70, CR2/7, 146-3,
User currently offlineEFCar98 From United States of America, joined May 2005, 137 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 3531 times:

an a340 freighter would surely have to be at bargain basement prices for its low MTOW

User currently offlineJlb From Denmark, joined Nov 1999, 68 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 3439 times:

Quoting EFCar98 (Reply 2):
an a340 freighter would surely have to be at bargain basement prices for its low MTOW

If anything the MTOW should be less important in a freighter than a passenger plane, because freighters are less adverse to fuel stops, or am I totally mistaken? And the MTOW of 253 to 275t for the 343 isn't particularly low for an airplane of that size. Actually I would imagine that the MZFW (174 to 180t vs 170t for the a332) would be far more critical, but I do not know how that compares to other similar types, and you would have to know the OEW for the freighter also in order for these numbers to be of any use in assesing the performance of an a340 freighter. If anything the numbers seem to suggest that an a343f wold carry a similar payload to a 332f, but over a much longer distance.


User currently onlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30623 posts, RR: 84
Reply 4, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 3257 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Freight companies don't appear to be as concerned about efficiency as passenger carriers are, so the A343F might make a decent replacement for any 742Fs and early DC-10Fs floating around. I am guessing the 757F will be a more popular replacement for the DC-8F - unless the DC-8 has more range, in which case the A343F might work for that role, as well.

User currently offlineGARUDAROD From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 1516 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 3104 times:

One thing that would have to be addressed is the A340 has notorious weight/balance problems
primarily related to the length of the nose landing gear. One wonders that since Airbus are not
noted for length in service, ie the break up of several early A320s, how much of an economic life
would an old A340 have left, even after it is rebuilt as a freighter?



Cargo doesn't whine, moan, or complain
User currently onlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30623 posts, RR: 84
Reply 6, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 3094 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Perhaps the A343F will have the extended nose gear of the A332F?

User currently offlineDALCA From Netherlands, joined Aug 2006, 518 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 3064 times:

Freighters have to make a lot more fuel stops the pax jets if they are to fly with good payload margins.
Allmost all freighter's out of europe to the far east make a fuel stop somewhere. Either in the Emirates, like DXB and SHJ, or in the former Sovier Union. LH uses TSE and SHJ. TSE for the routes to China, Korea and Japan and SHJ for the routes to India and South East Asia.

Making a A340 freighter is a good idea because by the time that the A350 get;s really going there are going a lot of the older A340 models left over with hours on their airframes left over.



Zanair flight, please hold on finals as we have to clear rhino's off the runway. Next flight: AMS-FRA-AMS
User currently offlineColumba From Germany, joined Dec 2004, 7058 posts, RR: 4
Reply 8, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 3017 times:

Quoting GARUDAROD (Reply 5):
One wonders that since Airbus are not
noted for length in service, ie the break up of several early A320s, how much of an economic life
would an old A340 have left, even after it is rebuilt as a freighter?

Older A32xs will also be converted into freighters after the conversion both the A320F and A340F will have lots of structural changes and will serve for a long time.



It will forever be a McDonnell Douglas MD 80 , Boeing MD 80 sounds so wrong
User currently offlineMoo From Falkland Islands, joined May 2007, 3875 posts, RR: 5
Reply 9, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 2995 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 6):
Perhaps the A343F will have the extended nose gear of the A332F?

Unlikely, this A340F conversion project is unlinked to Airbus and the conversion company will hold the supplementary type certificate.

Changing the nose wheel would be conceivable, but it would be one of the more extreme conversions done. More likely this is just going to involve the cargo door and maybe main deck strengthening.

Quoting GARUDAROD (Reply 5):
One wonders that since Airbus are not
noted for length in service, ie the break up of several early A320s, how much of an economic life
would an old A340 have left, even after it is rebuilt as a freighter?

They could have quite a life left, if more and more airlines dump them for more efficient twins over the next 5 years, then you could see some relatively young aircraft coming up for conversion.


User currently onlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30623 posts, RR: 84
Reply 10, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 2907 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Moo (Reply 9):
Unlikely, this A340F conversion project is unlinked to Airbus and the conversion company will hold the supplementary type certificate.

Changing the nose wheel would be conceivable, but it would be one of the more extreme conversions done. More likely this is just going to involve the cargo door and maybe main deck strengthening.

I know the A332F had the extended nose gear because the plane is in a "nose down" attitude on the ground and makes it easier to load and unload due to a cabin that is now level.

The A343 has this same "nose down" level and Flight International noted in their January 22nd issue on the A332F that cargo industry sources felt after-market A330 and A340 conversions would also need to have the gear modified to allow easier loading and unloading.

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...ut-levels-cabin-floor-to-ease.html


User currently offlineZeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 8877 posts, RR: 75
Reply 11, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 2504 times:

Quoting GARUDAROD (Reply 5):
One thing that would have to be addressed is the A340 has notorious weight/balance problems primarily related to the length of the nose landing gear.

Please tell me more...... having operated the type for years, this is the first time I hear of a "notorious weight/balance problems", or is this just another pure B/S comment with no factual backup ?

Quoting Stitch (Reply 10):

The A343 has this same "nose down" level and Flight International noted in their January 22nd issue on the A332F that cargo industry sources felt after-market A330 and A340 conversions would also need to have the gear modified to allow easier loading and unloading.

The Airbus conversion that they looked at involved placing the A300-600T droop nose and a forward loading opening on the A340-300F-U, the existing A340 cockpit is retained on the front of that plug.



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently onlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30623 posts, RR: 84
Reply 12, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 2478 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Zeke (Reply 11):

The Airbus conversion that they looked at involved placing the A300-600T droop nose and a forward loading opening on the A340-300F-U, the existing A340 cockpit is retained on the front of that plug.

So Bedek Aviation wants to adapt the A340ST proposal Airbus was kicking around, just without the over-sized upper deck?

Interesting...


User currently offlineZeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 8877 posts, RR: 75
Reply 13, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 2463 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 12):

Interesting...

Nope that was Airbus 10 years ago



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently onlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30623 posts, RR: 84
Reply 14, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 2369 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Okay, I'm confused now. Guess I'll just wait to see if anyone takes Bedek up on the A340CF and see what it looks like when it rolls out.  Smile

User currently offlineEI321 From Iraq, joined Jul 2009, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 2302 times:

Quoting GARUDAROD (Reply 5):
One thing that would have to be addressed is the A340 has notorious weight/balance problems
primarily related to the length of the nose landing gear.

Ive seen several MD11s up ended and that has not dented the MD11F programme. I think this wont be an issue.

Quoting GARUDAROD (Reply 5):
One wonders that since Airbus are not
noted for length in service, ie the break up of several early A320s, how much of an economic life
would an old A340 have left, even after it is rebuilt as a freighter?

Again, the A320's being broken has little to do with the aircrafts operational like, and more to do with the value of their second hand parts. The exact same can be said for the 777 that was parted out with just 11 years in service. If the value of the aircrafts parts exceeds the value of the intact aircraft it will be parted.


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...
Saudi's Prince Bandar's GBP75m A340. posted Mon Jun 11 2007 21:59:40 by OA260
Why An SQ A340 At AMS/SPL Csc? posted Wed Jan 9 2002 15:44:31 by Schreiner
Photo Of The Korean MD-11 Cargo On Its Tail posted Wed Jan 9 2002 07:31:04 by Anton P.
Boeing 707 Cargo At Bargain Price posted Wed Jan 9 2002 02:33:30 by Connector4you
Air France 777/A340 Routes posted Tue Jan 8 2002 23:27:44 by Cba
YHM's Future(transatlantic,cargo) posted Tue Jan 8 2002 20:10:21 by Fly_yhm
Pilot Stops El Al Cargo Plane Enroute... posted Tue Jan 8 2002 07:42:32 by Elal106
Austrian Airlines A340 At FRA Today posted Sat Jan 5 2002 14:58:14 by 9V-SPF
SQ Raffles Class: 744 Vs. A340 posted Fri Jan 4 2002 20:15:12 by Nickofatlanta
Beautiful "Building An A340-600" Video! posted Fri Jan 4 2002 09:48:22 by 747-600X