Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
A340F Wrt MD11F  
User currently offlineVirginFlyer From New Zealand, joined Sep 2000, 4575 posts, RR: 41
Posted (13 years 9 months 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 1273 times:

There has been talk from Airbus of a freight version of the A340-200. What I am wondering is how this would stack up against the MD11F, which seems very popular with freight operators. Which would offer the best payload capability, efficiency, and range (I am assuming the A340 for the latter, but who knows...)? I know that the MD11F has a wider fuselage, but then again, operators such as FedEx and UPS use the A300F with their standard containers, so this shouldn't be much of a limitation, if anything, it makes for less wasted space.

While on this topic, another thought comes to mind: why do Airbus not make a freighter of the A340-500 instead. It would offer a better payload capacity (both volumetrically and by weight), while being long range. There is a fair ammount of range which could be traded off for even more weight, making it a very nice freighter. It would also add a sales boost to the Trent A340 family. Just my 2¢!

V/F


"So powerful is the light of unity that it can illuminate the whole earth." - Bahá'u'lláh
8 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineJoni From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (13 years 9 months 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 1207 times:


A340-500 is very expensive, ans 342 already has a long range.


User currently offlineRyaneverest From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (13 years 9 months 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 1197 times:

I've read from this forum some time ago that the A330 and A340 are specifically designed for passenger operations and that they are not efficient in doing all-cargo transportation. I don't know why though, maybe the guys who had said that can stand out and point it out.

User currently offlineRw From Netherlands, joined Dec 2005, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (13 years 9 months 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 1186 times:

Why do you all talk about a freighter version of the A340-200. As I understood, it´s the A330-200 which Airbus is considering!!! Just look at airbus.com!!!

User currently offlineGerardo From Spain, joined May 2000, 3481 posts, RR: 31
Reply 4, posted (13 years 9 months 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 1169 times:

Rw

Could you please drop a note, where you found that at www.airbus.com? I didn't find it but have seen both aircraft mentioned as possible future freighters: the A330-200 and the A340-200.

Regards
Gerardo



dominguez(dash)online(dot)ch ... Pushing the limits of my equipment
User currently offlineFDXmech From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 3251 posts, RR: 34
Reply 5, posted (13 years 9 months 1 day ago) and read 1159 times:

As much as I like the A340-200/300, I doubt its freighter capability. The weight of payload carried by a freighter is much greater than that of a pax airplane which is why when you compare pax vs freighter, for example the 747-400, the freighter version has roughly half the range. The zero fuel weight (zfw) with a fully laden freighter is very high, limiting the amount of fuel that can be carried before reaching its max takeoff weight. But though this is true of all freighters as compared to their pax counterparts, the fact that the A340-200/300 has marginal thrust from its CFM56 engines which though ok and very efficient for pax ops, would severely constrain its use as a freighter. On the other hand, the A340-5/600 might be very well suited as would be the A330-200 (IMHO a nice A300-600 successor).


You're only as good as your last departure.
User currently offlineJoni From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (13 years 9 months 1 day ago) and read 1150 times:


Oh yes, it's mentioned in the "Feature Story" part of the site and is, indeed, 330-200F.



User currently offlineDatamanA340 From South Korea, joined Dec 2000, 547 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (13 years 9 months 4 hours ago) and read 1120 times:

Completely agree to FDXmech. 340-200F must be lack of thrust.

User currently offlineCrj-900 From Canada, joined Jan 2001, 87 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (13 years 9 months ago) and read 1097 times:

Only info I have to offer is with regards to the containers. A300/A340/A330 are the same width, so the options for containers are a plenty. Newly desinged AXX (88"*+ 125" base) containers are shaped for the airbus widebody. These containers are half the width of the aircrafts main deck, and sit side by side.

The A330 always seemed to be a logical choice. Only problem I can see with the aircraft, is a lack of the third main gear. Thus the ramp wieght would be much lower. I would bet that if they are planning to offer new A330F's they would add the third main gear of the A340.

Time will only tell. All the best. crj-900


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...
MD11F Incident At EMA This Morning (8/4) posted Wed Apr 8 2009 10:44:41 by Kaitak
MD11F Ethiopian , A340 Air Asia Xpress , Photos? posted Thu Feb 12 2009 13:56:49 by FCKC
Shanghai Cargo New MD11F At Frankfurt? posted Fri Jun 6 2008 22:53:14 by RobK
Etihad To Get MD11F? posted Fri Sep 7 2007 02:19:09 by YVRLTN
A340F In DHL Fleet 10 Or 20 Years From Now? posted Tue Dec 5 2006 20:37:10 by 747400sp
Last MD11F For China Airlines posted Fri May 13 2005 23:04:35 by Lazyshaun
Basel/Mulhouse Question Wrt Air France posted Sun Apr 10 2005 00:46:42 by MaverickM11
Transmile MD11F KUL-LAX posted Thu Sep 9 2004 22:58:29 by Eta unknown
AC To Start MD11F Ops YYZ-FRA posted Wed Sep 8 2004 20:05:18 by DABZF
Lufthansa Adding 5 MD11F From What Airline? posted Sun Nov 9 2003 19:51:05 by Yqfca