Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
A330F Looks Like A Tight Fit  
User currently offlineAirTran737 From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 3705 posts, RR: 12
Posted (4 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days ago) and read 18041 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

http://www.airliners.net/photo/Airbu...ustrie/Airbus-A330-223F/1653118/L/

As a loadmaster on the MD-11 and 747-400F I can say that I am very happy that I won't ever touch the A330F. There is no room to walk the sides of your cargo load. Being that it is so tight you will have a tough time accommodating all of the C.A.O. freight that must be accessible. Also, the contours look absolutely vicious. Seems like this plane is destined to be loaded with AAY's rather than palletized cargo, which will make a lot of operators hate it. Anyone have more info on this bird?


Nice Trip Report!!! Great Pics, thanks for posting!!!! B747Forever
34 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31132 posts, RR: 85
Reply 1, posted (4 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days ago) and read 17969 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Any idea of how this compares to a 767-300F using 96x125" pallets?

User currently offlineteva From France, joined Jan 2001, 1873 posts, RR: 16
Reply 2, posted (4 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days ago) and read 17824 times:

Airtran737,

Here, you can see 2 examples of configurations.
With the 96*125 in the back, you have 2 corridors, left and right.
With the 2 88 side by side, there is no more corridor. All the space is used , which is good for the operator. (it is expensive to carry air "by air". (reason why Fx does not use 747s, for instance)

BTW, have you ever loaded the following freighters: 757s, 737s, or older 727s and DC8s?
There is no corridor .
And every day, you have hundreds of planes like this flying, with no problem. So basically, airlines and loadmaster can live with it.

Do you prefer to be loadmaster on a bulk loaded An124, or Il76? I have seen some in DXB, loaded with small boxes. Truly amazing. And once loaded, no corridor...

Not all the planes give you the comfort of a 747. But at least, they do what airlines are expecting from them. And I am pertty sure that after a few flights, you will have no problem loading A330s

Teva



Ecoute les orgues, Elles jouent pour toi...C'est le requiem pour un con
User currently offlinefxramper From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 7313 posts, RR: 85
Reply 3, posted (4 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 17707 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting AirTran737 (Thread starter):

  

FX will entertain the idea so they get a great deal with Boeing to replace aging MD10.



I miss the old Anet.
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 25844 posts, RR: 50
Reply 4, posted (4 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 17680 times:

The A330 is no different then current A310/A300F with the same fuselage barrel width. So I doubt it will be any surprise to operators.

btw here are the available configurations on the A330F.
http://www.airbus.com/en/aircraftfam...es/a330a340/a330-200f/deck-layout/



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlinelotsamiles From United States of America, joined May 2005, 323 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (4 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 17483 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 1):
Any idea of how this compares to a 767-300F using 96x125" pallets?

The A330F can do 96" ULD's side by side, whereas the 767 can go only 88" wide side by side (SBS).

The A300 and A310 freighters flying around today have 88" SBS only, I believe the 96" SBS was a very recent "upgrade" to the program.

The usefulness of the 96" SBS will be up to each operator, certainly it offers compatibility to the 747F, etc. However, as the OP notes, the contouring will be very restrictive and mistakes will lead to punctured liners, etc. that may cause delays.


User currently offlineAirTran737 From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 3705 posts, RR: 12
Reply 6, posted (4 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 17398 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting teva (Reply 2):




Thanks for the info Teva. The MD-11 in an 88X108 is a tight fight as well. Fortunately the military doesn't tend to have tall freight, so we are able to get where we need to go on the plane. Can it only do one 88X108? The MD-11 takes two, but then there is no corridor.

Quoting teva (Reply 2):
Do you prefer to be loadmaster on a bulk loaded An124, or Il76?



Haven't been a loadmaster for either of them, but I can tell you that I would much rather be on the 124 due to the IL76 reeking like an open pit toilet.



Nice Trip Report!!! Great Pics, thanks for posting!!!! B747Forever
User currently offlineSeaBosDca From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 5650 posts, RR: 6
Reply 7, posted (4 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 17347 times:

Quoting fxramper (Reply 3):
FX will entertain the idea so they get a great deal with Boeing to replace aging MD10.

What would they buy from Boeing to replace MD-10s? The 767-300F is too small. The 777F is severe overkill.

The only real competition for the A330F would be converted used 777-200F (MD-10-10) or 777-200ERF (MD-10-30).


User currently offlineNicoEDDF From Germany, joined Jan 2008, 1101 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (4 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 17118 times:

Quoting AirTran737 (Thread starter):
which will make a lot of operators hate it

Yeah, i am absolutely sure that will be the case!  
Operators always hate the idea of ultra-efficient volume usage in an ultra-efficient platform!

Oh well, at least something to laugh about in the evening!


User currently offlinewjcandee From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5267 posts, RR: 24
Reply 9, posted (4 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 16936 times:

Quoting NicoEDDF (Reply 8):
Operators always hate the idea of ultra-efficient volume usage in an ultra-efficient platform!

Operators hate delays and days out of service due to airplane damage from employee errors in tight clearances.


User currently offlineNicoEDDF From Germany, joined Jan 2008, 1101 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (4 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 16775 times:

Quoting wjcandee (Reply 9):
Operators hate delays and days out of service due to airplane damage from employee errors in tight clearances.

Yeah, right...  

Operators are ALWAYS buying larger planes to give employees the slack of not working carefully and professional.


User currently offlinescbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12676 posts, RR: 46
Reply 11, posted (4 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 16613 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting teva (Reply 2):
Do you prefer to be loadmaster on a bulk loaded An124, or Il76? I have seen some in DXB, loaded with small boxes. Truly amazing. And once loaded, no corridor...

You mean like this one seen at Sharjah?

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Steve Brimley




Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana!
User currently offlinewjcandee From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5267 posts, RR: 24
Reply 12, posted (4 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 16508 times:

Quoting NicoEDDF (Reply 10):
Operators are ALWAYS buying larger planes to give employees the slack of not working carefully and professional.

One reason the 737 has been only marginally-used as a freighter in the US is the lack of distance between the front of the wing and the rear of the cargo door, making it vulnerable to ramp rash.

If folks work "carefully and professional[ly[", the thing is fine. If they don't -- oops, we're out of service.

And yet there are very few of them in service in the US, with this being one of the reasons. (I am of course well aware that TNT uses them, as does DHL in some limited places.)


User currently offlineRJ111 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (4 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 16497 times:

Quoting fxramper (Reply 3):
FX will entertain the idea so they get a great deal with Boeing to replace aging MD10.

Having the largest A310 and A300 fleet in the world does seem to indicate they don't have too much of a problem with the cross section of the thing.


User currently offlineN328KF From United States of America, joined May 2004, 6491 posts, RR: 3
Reply 14, posted (4 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 16363 times:

Quoting SeaBosDca (Reply 7):
What would they buy from Boeing to replace MD-10s? The 767-300F is too small. The 777F is severe overkill.

But we know they love the 777F. Three in service, 29 more to come, and 15 options. Who knows, they might decide that this will be a good option to replace their DC-10s.



When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' T.Roosevelt
User currently offlineSeaBosDca From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 5650 posts, RR: 6
Reply 15, posted (4 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 16096 times:

Quoting N328KF (Reply 14):
But we know they love the 777F. Three in service, 29 more to come, and 15 options. Who knows, they might decide that this will be a good option to replace their DC-10s.

The 777F is the right aircraft for the long hauls, but its capability is totally wasted on the short domestic routes that keep the MD-10 busy most of the time. Rather than buying new 777Fs, the company could either save massively on acquisition costs and get used 777s, or save massively on operating costs and get A330s -- with little loss in capability for the mission. Unless there's something I don't know, buying 777Fs for use on short routes would be throwing money out a window.


User currently offlineNicoEDDF From Germany, joined Jan 2008, 1101 posts, RR: 1
Reply 16, posted (4 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 16025 times:

Quoting wjcandee (Reply 12):
One reason the 737 has been only marginally-used as a freighter in the US is the lack of distance between the front of the wing and the rear of the cargo door, making it vulnerable to ramp rash.

Or maybe because the 737 was just in performance figures not the best freighter overall?

Quoting wjcandee (Reply 12):
If folks work "carefully and professional[ly[", the thing is fine. If they don't -- oops, we're out of service.

At least the cargo haulers I know do work carefully and profesionally. You might not believe it but they can actually load and unload the aircraft without destroying the frame frequently. They do it in FRA as well as in LEJ, in JNB and in NBO and whereever I can think of.
But then again, may we just work more professional in German airlines?

Und das nächste Mal weise ich dich in die Spezifika des deutschen Adverbs ein, Freund William.  
Auch westlich vom Pond sollt ihr schließlich flüssig Fremdsprachen lernen!


User currently offlineborism From Estonia, joined Oct 2006, 431 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (4 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 15679 times:

Quoting RJ111 (Reply 13):
Having the largest A310 and A300 fleet in the world does seem to indicate they don't have too much of a problem with the cross section of the thing
Quoting N328KF (Reply 14):
But we know they love the 777F. Three in service, 29 more to come, and 15 options. Who knows, they might decide that this will be a good option to replace their DC-10s.

Relax, as long as there is air freight demand they will buy everything of anything.


User currently offlinewjcandee From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5267 posts, RR: 24
Reply 18, posted (4 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 14834 times:

Quoting NicoEDDF (Reply 16):
But then again, may we just work more professional in German airlines?

Die Deutschen sind besser auf alles!


User currently offlineAirTran737 From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 3705 posts, RR: 12
Reply 19, posted (4 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 14586 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting NicoEDDF (Reply 16):
They do it in FRA as well as in

As they should being that it is a LHCargo/DHL/AeroLogic hub

Quoting NicoEDDF (Reply 16):
and in NBO and

I have some great shots from NBO where some of those amazing loaders ripped a light out of my lower deck ceiling. I also have pick of them loading pallets of flowers that were so out of contour that they ripped the gil liner out of the plane as well. Loaders screw up everywhere. I watched a load crew put a 20ft pallet through the wall on a GSS 744 last night. Thankfully it was not my plane, so I just walked away and told the mechanic to get a patch kit. I have seen idiocy beyond imagine from loading crews all over the world, that even includes the precious fatherland, but the worst of the worst tends to happen in West Africa.

http://www.airbus.com/en/aircraftfam...es/a330a340/a330-200f/deck-layout/

Can the A330F take 20 ft pallets? The basic diagram on the Airbus website doesnt specify



Nice Trip Report!!! Great Pics, thanks for posting!!!! B747Forever
User currently offlinefxramper From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 7313 posts, RR: 85
Reply 20, posted (4 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 14535 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting SeaBosDca (Reply 7):
What would they buy from Boeing to replace MD-10s?



A lot of domestic markets that use the MD10 are underutilized. The gurus might like a full 76F vs a 75% full MD10.



I miss the old Anet.
User currently offlinelotsamiles From United States of America, joined May 2005, 323 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (4 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 14263 times:

Quoting AirTran737 (Reply 19):
Can the A330F take 20 ft pallets? The basic diagram on the Airbus website doesnt specify

You can fit a 20ft pallet in the aircraft by turning it through the door, however I am not sure if the standard cargo system is configured with the right restraints for it.


User currently offlinePanAm788 From United States of America, joined Sep 2008, 292 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (4 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 13314 times:

Quoting wjcandee (Reply 18):
Die Deutschen sind besser auf alles!

Haha "the Germans are better on top of everyone", you are proving his point that Americans should learn other languages!
But back on topic

Quoting lotsamiles (Reply 5):
The A330F can do 96" ULD's side by side, whereas the 767 can go only 88" wide side by side (SBS).

The A300 and A310 freighters flying around today have 88" SBS only, I believe the 96" SBS was a very recent "upgrade" to the program

How can they do that? They are all the same fuselage width. Gaining 16'' in width even with an upgrade is a bit unbelievable to me.



You know nothing Jon Snow
User currently offlineZeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 9180 posts, RR: 76
Reply 23, posted (4 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 12171 times:

Quoting AirTran737 (Thread starter):
There is no room to walk the sides of your cargo load.

When was the last time you walked beside the underfloor cargo load on a MD-11F or 747F ?

Quoting fxramper (Reply 3):

FX will entertain the idea so they get a great deal with Boeing to replace aging MD10.

The 767ERF is about a 50% reduction in cash operating cost per tonne over a DC-10-30SF with reduced volume, and about 16 tonnes less mass capability, and less range. The A330-200F is about a 70% reduction for the same volume, and same payload mass, and same range, or better.

Quoting AirTran737 (Reply 6):
Can it only do one 88X108?

Two



Quoting AirTran737 (Reply 19):
Can the A330F take 20 ft pallets?

I assume so, I have seen configurations where they have two vehicle side by side on the main deck.

Quoting fxramper (Reply 20):

A lot of domestic markets that use the MD10 are underutilized. The gurus might like a full 76F vs a 75% full MD10.

That is true in terms of economics, but a full 763ERF is not a 75% load of a MD-10. I think depending on the ULD/pallets being used, the 332F and MD-10 takes exactly the same number (i.e. same volume), plus the have the same payload mass capability, with around a 70% reduction in cost.



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently offlinejonathan-l From France, joined Mar 2002, 506 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (4 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 10963 times:

Quoting fxramper (Reply 20):
The gurus might like a full 76F vs a 75% full MD10

Can the 767F fit AYY + AMJ as is done on A300/A310?
I think A330P2F + A330-200F would make a great fleet for FedEx to replace DC-10 + MD-10.

Quoting PanAm788 (Reply 22):
How can they do that? They are all the same fuselage width. Gaining 16'' in width even with an upgrade is a bit unbelievable to me

767F is 24 inches narrower than an A330, which translates generally into 1 extra seat cross-wise for the A330 vs the 767 (8 vs 7) and the ability to load 96" pallets side-by-side when the 767F is limited to 88" pallets side-by-side.


25 r2rho : This is where I see a the business case for an A333F - routes needing 777F-like capacity but not the range. IMO, it's only a matter of time before Ai
26 lotsamiles : The 88" SBS left a small aisle between the ULD and the fuselage. With the 96" SBS there is barely any room. They simply did not use all of the availa
27 Post contains images NicoEDDF : Indeed! You know what? I don't doubt that people screw all over the world loading airplanes. But your ridiculous argument was, that more empty (waste
28 fi642 : Get used to it, you could be working them in the next couple of years........
29 Post contains images AY-MD11 : The A330F is the same size to work than A300F and i have not hear any complaint it being too small to work with..When working with freight many years
30 ea772lr : More 777Fs? That'd be sweet. How is FX liking the 777F?
31 SeaBosDca : That would make a lot of sense, especially for older, lower-weight A333s. Those aircraft would make ideal short-range freighters for operators like F
32 N328KF : As I said previously, they have exercised 15 options into orders, added 15 more options, and are acquiring two existing orders, from Air France. They
33 wjcandee : Uh, that wasn't me. Oops.
34 Post contains images NicoEDDF : True, apologies for that. Nevertheless, the point remains.
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...
Looks Like The A340 May Be Obsolete posted Wed Jun 24 2009 06:07:31 by Jetfuel
Now This Looks Like A Real Airline! posted Thu Jun 18 2009 14:46:29 by Shankly
Looks Like NW Is Bringing Another 747 To SAN! posted Sat Nov 22 2008 20:41:18 by San747
Looks Like F9's Doing Pretty Good posted Mon Oct 6 2008 02:57:40 by AirportGuy1971
What A 787 Flight Deck Really Looks Like (pics) posted Thu Jun 12 2008 21:31:38 by IAD787
Merger: DL/NW Looks Like The Deal Is On! posted Sun Apr 13 2008 14:13:54 by Tl8490
Looks Like AA Is Going 777 JFK-CDG Beginning 09/08 posted Sat Feb 16 2008 11:42:39 by UAL747
Looks Like IAH-DXB Is Going Daily posted Mon Sep 24 2007 21:09:19 by LAXdude1023
Looks Like AA Is Going To Get ORD-PEK posted Fri Aug 3 2007 05:30:35 by CactusOne
AZ: Looks Like Liquidation Is Going To Happen posted Thu Jul 19 2007 12:51:22 by UAL777UK