Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
UPS And The A300F  
User currently offlineEBJ1248650 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1932 posts, RR: 1
Posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 3525 times:

UPS at one time had some issues regarding operations with the A300-600F. As I recall, they had problems with loading the airplane. Have those problems been completely resolved and what is UPS's feeling about the airplane now?


Dare to dream; dream big!
28 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30411 posts, RR: 84
Reply 1, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 3470 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Well 5X did reduce their A300-600 order by 37 and later placed an order for 27 767-300Fs, so they evidently felt 53 were enough of the former. The 767-300F will out-lift, out-volume and out-range the A300-600 so 5X might have wanted more flexibility by having around 50 of each type.

User currently offlinePilotboi From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 2366 posts, RR: 9
Reply 2, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 3208 times:

I'm not really sure what problems you're talking about, since I'm new with UPS. But I do know that not a single can is to come off or go on without the tail stand in place.

User currently offlineKaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 12397 posts, RR: 37
Reply 3, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 3204 times:



Quoting EBJ1248650 (Thread starter):
I'm not really sure what problems you're talking about, since I'm new with UPS. But I do know that not a single can is to come off or go on without the tail stand in place.

Does that apply to the 757/767 as well? I've heard/seen pictures of the nose pointing skyward on an MD11 (not UPS) and 747, but never with the A300.


User currently offlineRampGuy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 3115 times:

There is a picture of an FedEx MD 11 tipped on its tail at the Indy Hub taken around 2001 somewhere here on A-Net. Can't remember what happened or why it tipped over.

User currently offlineMls515 From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 3076 posts, RR: 9
Reply 5, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 3103 times:

I've ridden on them a few times. I think the crews generally like them. After showing me around, the FO told me he had to go "feed the autopilot" and went down a hatch in the cockpit to inspect the avionics bay. I told him, "Man, your climbing down into the plot of a bad aviation disaster movie!" I was surprised that there was such a large compartment under the flight deck.

User currently offlineHondah35 From United States of America, joined May 2007, 115 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 3008 times:



Quoting Kaitak (Reply 3):
Does that apply to the 757/767 as well? I've heard/seen pictures of the nose pointing skyward on an MD11 (not UPS) and 747, but never with the A300.

Not sure about the A300, but the 757/767/DC-8 all require only a tail post, which basically just gives a visual reminder of the position of the tail in relation to the ground. The tail post is not load bearing, and if it hits the ground, you are in real danger of tail-tipping. The 747 requires a load bearing tail stand.


User currently offlineCol From Malaysia, joined Nov 2003, 2092 posts, RR: 22
Reply 7, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 2962 times:



Quoting Stitch (Reply 1):
The 767-300F will out-lift, out-volume and out-range the A300-600

I thought the 306F had more volume than the 763F.


User currently offlineLexy From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 2515 posts, RR: 9
Reply 8, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 2934 times:



Quoting Mls515 (Reply 5):
I've ridden on them a few times. I think the crews generally like them. After showing me around, the FO told me he had to go "feed the autopilot" and went down a hatch in the cockpit to inspect the avionics bay. I told him, "Man, your climbing down into the plot of a bad aviation disaster movie!" I was surprised that there was such a large compartment under the flight deck.

WOW! That's a cool story!



Nashville, Tennessee KBNA
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30411 posts, RR: 84
Reply 9, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 2908 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Col (Reply 7):
I thought the 306F had more volume than the 763F.

From the data I have seen for both, the total cubic volume for the A300-600F is 374m3 while for the 767-300F it is 438m3.


User currently offlinePilotboi From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 2366 posts, RR: 9
Reply 10, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 2881 times:



Quoting Kaitak (Reply 3):
Does that apply to the 757/767 as well? I've heard/seen pictures of the nose pointing skyward on an MD11 (not UPS) and 747, but never with the A300.



Quoting Hondah35 (Reply 6):
Not sure about the A300, but the 757/767/DC-8 all require only a tail post, which basically just gives a visual reminder of the position of the tail in relation to the ground. The tail post is not load bearing, and if it hits the ground, you are in real danger of tail-tipping. The 747 requires a load bearing tail stand.

We don't use anything for the 757.

From my experience (which isn't very long, but includes everything but the 767):

Load-bearing tail stand
A300
747 (based on Hondah35)

Tail post
767 (based on Hondah35)
DC-8

No stands
757 (?)
DC-10
MD-11


User currently offlineFX1816 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 1400 posts, RR: 4
Reply 11, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 2856 times:



Quoting Pilotboi (Reply 10):
We don't use anything for the 757.

From my experience (which isn't very long, but includes everything but the 767):

Load-bearing tail stand
A300
747 (based on Hondah35)

Tail post
767 (based on Hondah35)
DC-8

No stands
757 (?)
DC-10
MD-11

At FedEx they still use nose tethers on the MD/DC-10, MD-11 and the Airbii. The 727 had just a tail stand that it carried in the aft stairs. The 757 I'm not sure about since I left FX before that arrived.

FX1816


User currently offlineCX747 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 4453 posts, RR: 5
Reply 12, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 2583 times:

Do we have an actual reason as to why UPS cancelled their remaining A300 order in favor of more 767s? I'm not trying to start an A vs B war because both of these aircraft are outstanding aircraft.


"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
User currently offlineGigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 85
Reply 13, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 2538 times:



Quoting Stitch (Reply 1):
he 767-300F will out-lift, out-volume and out-range the A300-600 so 5X might have wanted more flexibility by having around 50 of each type.

That isn't right. The 767-300F can out-range, but that's it.

NS


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30411 posts, RR: 84
Reply 14, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 2513 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Gigneil (Reply 13):
That isn't right. The 767-300F can out-range, but that's it.

The data provided in www.aircraft-commerce.com/sample_art...ticles/freight_business_sample.pdf shows the 767-300SF to have more total volume and tare weight then the A300-600F and A300-600RF, the latter of which wikipedia says 5X operates.

If you have other data, I'd be appreciative so I can update my records.


User currently offlineBrowntailWhale From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 213 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 2437 times:

http://www.pressroom.ups.com/mediaki...05,1278,00.html?mkname=upsairlines

User currently offlineGigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 85
Reply 16, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 3 days ago) and read 2336 times:



Quoting Stitch (Reply 14):
If you have other data, I'd be appreciative so I can update my records.

We'll split the difference... in 5X config, the A300 carries more containers, but the 763 can lift more dead weight.

NS


User currently offlineDFWramper From United States of America, joined Nov 2008, 57 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 2317 times:



Quoting BrowntailWhale (Reply 15):
http://www.pressroom.ups.com/mediaki...05,1278,00.html?mkname=upsairlines

Ok, some of this data on the UPS website seems suspect.

First, the length of a 747-100 and 747-400 is the same? I don't know for sure, but that seems unlikely. And if the length truly is the same, how'd they get 1 more topside position configured?

In addition, the -400 carries (according to this website) 9,000 more gallons of fuel, but has the same range? Seems unlikely as well.


User currently offlineDLPhoenix From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 416 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 2294 times:



Quoting DFWramper (Reply 17):
First, the length of a 747-100 and 747-400 is the same? I don't know for sure, but that seems unlikely.

This is indeed the case.
The 744 has a larger wingspan, but the same fuselage length.

DLP


User currently offlinePilotboi From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 2366 posts, RR: 9
Reply 19, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 2115 times:



Quoting Gigneil (Reply 16):
in 5X config, the A300 carries more containers, but the 763 can lift more dead weight

Didn't you read that fact sheet, or the fleet page? In 5X configs, the 763 holds 2 more containers then the A300.

Quoting DFWramper (Reply 17):
First, the length of a 747-100 and 747-400 is the same? I don't know for sure, but that seems unlikely. And if the length truly is the same, how'd they get 1 more topside position configured?

Why not just check Boeing's website? It is true. Both are 231'10". The 747-8 will be the first to get full fuselage plugs. If you're curious about the 1 container then, check out UPS's fleet page: http://www.ups.com/aircargo/using/se...ervices/domestic/svc-aircraft.html It shows that the 1 extra container is up front in the nose. They just squeezed it in there by shifting the other positions around a little. It should be noted that this is only an 88x125 position, not the larger 96x125 position.


User currently offlineJonathan-l From France, joined Mar 2002, 502 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 1989 times:



Quoting Stitch (Reply 1):
Well 5X did reduce their A300-600 order by 37 and later placed an order for 27 767-300Fs, so they evidently felt 53 were enough of the former. The 767-300F will out-lift, out-volume and out-range the A300-600 so 5X might have wanted more flexibility by having around 50 of each type



Quoting CX747 (Reply 12):
Do we have an actual reason as to why UPS cancelled their remaining A300 order in favor of more 767s? I'm not trying to start an A vs B war because both of these aircraft are outstanding aircraft.

Hi,
UPS "canceled" part of the A300-600 order in favor of the A380F: 37 A300-600F were converted into 10 A380F. But there was still a need for A300 sized widebodies that they would come back to later. When they did, the A300-600 was in its last stretch as Airbus had all but closed the line. In the end, with the A300-600 no longer being an option, the 767-300F was a good fit since they already have it in the fleet.


User currently offlineWjcandee From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5085 posts, RR: 19
Reply 21, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 1928 times:



Quoting Jonathan-l (Reply 20):
UPS "canceled" part of the A300-600 order in favor of the A380F: 37 A300-600F were converted into 10 A380F. But there was still a need for A300 sized widebodies that they would come back to later.

Hmmm....

My understanding was that UPS didn't want the rest of the A300s, and agreed to take A380s in return for being let out of its obligations vis a vis the A300s; i.e. the A300s weren't cancelled "in favor of" the A380s, but rather as one of the concessions Airbus offered in order to get UPS to take A380s.


User currently offlineGigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 85
Reply 22, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 1793 times:



Quoting Pilotboi (Reply 19):
Didn't you read that fact sheet, or the fleet page? In 5X configs, the 763 holds 2 more containers then the A300.

I did misread it, you're correct.

What this doesn't say is what containers we're talking about. Because we all know that a 767 can't carry LD3s side by side, and an A300 can.

NS


User currently offlineEBJ1248650 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1932 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 1776 times:



Quoting Wjcandee (Reply 21):
Hmmm....

My understanding was that UPS didn't want the rest of the A300s, and agreed to take A380s in return for being let out of its obligations vis a vis the A300s; i.e. the A300s weren't cancelled "in favor of" the A380s, but rather as one of the concessions Airbus offered in order to get UPS to take A380s.

I had understood the same thing. It seems that initially UPS had problems loading the A300s, something they needed to efficiently load the airplane wasn't there; can't for the life of me recall just what it was. That was what prompted me to start this thread to begin with, a quest to find out if UPS had resolved its issues with the airplane.



Dare to dream; dream big!
User currently offlineEBJ1248650 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1932 posts, RR: 1
Reply 24, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 1775 times:



Quoting Wjcandee (Reply 21):
My understanding was that UPS didn't want the rest of the A300s, and agreed to take A380s in return for being let out of its obligations vis a vis the A300s; i.e. the A300s weren't cancelled "in favor of" the A380s, but rather as one of the concessions Airbus offered in order to get UPS to take A380s.

It's ironic that UPS didn't (and maybe still doesn't) care for the airplane but Fed Ex appears to have grabbed up as many A300 and A310 airplanes as they could get for conversion to freighters. I still wonder if Fed Ex will be a prime customer for the A330F.



Dare to dream; dream big!
25 FX1816 : UPS doesn't use LD3's they use the larger LD7's and LD9's for the belly loads. What is totally incorrect about the 767 is that it CAN handle to LD3's
26 Pilotboi : Yes the A300 can, but like FX said...we don't use any LD3s. All belly cans for UPS are full-width. The A300 and 763 both have the same exact belly co
27 Wjcandee : One other thing...the 767 cruises a little faster than the A300, for what that's worth.
28 Jonathan-l : UPS ordered 30 A300 in 1998 and reordered another 60 in 2001, after already having taken delivery of 7 aircraft from the initial batch. UPS came back
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...
Air France Cargo And The A300F posted Sat Aug 21 2004 19:47:41 by BA
UPS And The Airbus posted Wed Oct 25 2000 23:48:41 by FedExHeavy
What Determines Where UPS And FedEx Fly In The US? posted Tue Mar 18 2008 16:28:52 by FalconBird
Feb 12th Weather @ SDF And The UPS Sort posted Tue Feb 12 2008 00:29:05 by Indy
How Does FedEx/UPS/DHL/and The Like Work? posted Wed May 17 2006 18:31:58 by B777A340Fan
Ups And Downs With The MD-80's. posted Sat Mar 27 2004 18:41:53 by Businessboy
Lacsa And The 757 posted Sun Nov 30 2008 23:41:44 by Jimbobjoe
NLM Cityhopper And The Nord 262: Story Behind Pic? posted Thu Oct 30 2008 08:15:44 by Vfw614
Delta And The 73G posted Sun Oct 26 2008 13:42:09 by FlyASAGuy2005
Air Asia And The 737 posted Tue Oct 7 2008 04:30:06 by Zeke