Stitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 26700 posts, RR: 83 Reply 1, posted (1 year 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 17480 times:
They have secured 60 orders for the type through the end of December 2011, which is quite respectable. That's about half of the 767-300F's and 777F's order books (111 and 127, respectively), so there seems to be a market.
Roseflyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 8740 posts, RR: 52 Reply 2, posted (1 year 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 17461 times:
It has about 60 orders. The freighter market is not as large as the passenger market. The A330F has to compete not only against new build 767s and 777s, but also against converted freighters.
The 777 has about double the orders, but I think a large part of that has to do with it having more range and being better suited to intercontinental flying and it can replace MD11s.
I'd expect the A330 to continue to sell. They lost the competition for FedEx and UPS, which is why they look far worse than the 767 or 777, but I don't think the numbers are that bad. New built freighters is a small market and it's additional revenue on top of existing models. That's why we don't see the manufacturers investing in freighter models early on in airplane development. The MTOW improvements over time make a freighter worthwhile. The A330F has only been in service for a few years, as Airbus had been sticking with A300Fs.
[Edited 2012-02-01 16:24:44]
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
Max Q From United States of America, joined May 2001, 3289 posts, RR: 19 Reply 3, posted (1 year 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 17412 times:
It seemed like an ideal DC10 / A300 replacement at FDX but I understand if the 763F could do the job it is a lot cheaper plus you have commonality with their 757's.
Perhaps UPS might look at it.
Who has bought most of them ?
The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.
PM From India, joined Feb 2005, 6715 posts, RR: 65 Reply 4, posted (1 year 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 17382 times:
Quoting Stitch (Reply 1): They have secured 60 orders for the type through the end of December 2011, which is quite respectable.
The headline number isn't bad. The problem is the relatively small list of end users. Most orders (41 out of 62 by the end of January) are from leasing companies and most have yet to be placed.
Orders below with deliveries to date in brackets.
Aircastle 3 (3) (All 3 to Hong Kong / Hainan)
Avion 8 (0)
BOC 5 (0)
Intrepid 19 (0)
MalinPatterson 6 (0)
crownvic From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 1594 posts, RR: 6 Reply 6, posted (1 year 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 16813 times:
It's too expensive, for the typical freight operator and the sales figures are NOT good. Once you take out the few "players" like Fedex or UPS that could afford this a/c, the remainder is quite slim. Also, freight is not as forgiving as a pax flight. The pax A332 is successful on long hauls because there is a big long haul market that cannot support a 77L, 744, A345/6 or A380 load. That formula does not work well for freight. Freight needs big loads and that is why you do not see small a/c operating long haul freight flights. Freighters also have more down time, vs. a pax a/c, hence lower utilization. Not sure on the current cost of new build A332F but I would estimate it is between 75-100 times the price of a paid off DC/MD-10. The older paid off planes can be parked with no problem. You cannot allow a new build A332F to sit idle. Personally, I never understood why Airbus did not put the effort into the A333 as a freighter. Yes, it would have had more limited range, but it would seem to have had capacity closer to a DC-10 replacement.
Airbus seems to know what they are doing w/ their pax types, but when it comes to the freighter market, the 332F has Airbus openly admitting the sales figures are a bit disappointing. The cancellation of the A380F also was in my opinion, a mistake too, considering UPS and FedEx were aboard w/ orders.
BMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 14330 posts, RR: 26 Reply 7, posted (1 year 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 16743 times:
I'd say that the fact that many freight carriers have not yet started replacing A300s and 767s on a large scale is mostly responsible. Plus the fact that A330s are still in demand as passenger planes doesn't help either.
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
Stitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 26700 posts, RR: 83 Reply 8, posted (1 year 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 16724 times:
Quoting crownvic (Reply 6): Personally, I never understood why Airbus did not put the effort into the A333 as a freighter. Yes, it would have had more limited range, but it would seem to have had capacity closer to a DC-10 replacement.
The A330-200F matches the DC-10-30F in a number of areas:
Volume: 475m3 for the A330-200F | 470m3 for the DC-10-30F
Payload: Both will lift 70 tons
Range: 5930km for the A330-200F | 5500km for the DC-10-30F
Max Q From United States of America, joined May 2001, 3289 posts, RR: 19 Reply 9, posted (1 year 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 16411 times:
Maybe it's best days are yet to come.
The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.
ghifty From United States of America, joined Jul 2010, 759 posts, RR: 0 Reply 12, posted (1 year 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 15888 times:
Is the humpy thing on the nose partly responsible?
Cargolex From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1160 posts, RR: 9 Reply 13, posted (1 year 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 15826 times:
Quoting ghifty (Reply 12): Is the humpy thing on the nose partly responsible?
Without the hump, there'd be no A330 F at all, since the standard aircraft has a decidedly nose-down stance, which is not a good thing when you're loading thousands of tons of cargo. The load floor needs to be level, hence the nose blister.
Quoting migair54 (Reply 11): Is it possible to convert the current A330 planes to A330F??
Have you had a word with Mr. Al-Baker recently...?
Airbus are under pressure to develop P2F programmes for the A330 (especially the -300) but they are reluctant to do so as such a development might further weaken A330F sales.
A certain Middle East airline is increasingly impatient with them...
scouseflyer From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2006, 3254 posts, RR: 10 Reply 15, posted (1 year 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 15752 times:
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 7): Plus the fact that A330s are still in demand as passenger planes doesn't help either.
I'd go along with that, didnt one of the lessors recently convert some of their A332F orders to pax A330s as they are more in demand and get better rates.
I expect as the A350 and 787 come more on line, more A332Fs will start to get produced (as the A306 became exclusively frieghter in it's last few years).
CZ346 From United States of America, joined Feb 2012, 95 posts, RR: 0 Reply 18, posted (1 year 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 15422 times:
Like stated above, a big thing is that it is too expensive to see a large quantity of orders right off the bat.
IMHO, when cargo operators purchase new aircraft , that plane needs to be able to strongly outperform ones in their current fleet (or just look really really cool . . . aka 748). Look at what happened to the a38F. Thats even a craft the offers unrivaled capacity...
The 767 is already a massively used aircraft for this class of cargo capacity. Its much cheaper for them to buy used and takes very little to modify it. Sure, the 332 has a much better range, but lets be honest - most cargo airlines aren't worried TOO much about range on that size of plane. Boxes and palletts don't care if the flight from PVG to JFK has a 3-4 hours stop in ANC. Even if there is a "rush" and something DESPERATELY needs to make it 11,000 miles overnight, chances are its going to get chucked on a pax flight anyway. One exception to this is obviously FedEx, who loves their 777's, but thats FedEx. They just kinda do what they want and still make tons of money.
I love the 330. Its one of my favorite planes, and honestly for a new freighter, I think 50 on the book is an awesome start for it and hope to see it around CAN soon!
fx1816 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 1400 posts, RR: 5 Reply 19, posted (1 year 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 15277 times:
Quoting CZ346 (Reply 18): Boxes and palletts don't care if the flight from PVG to JFK has a 3-4 hours stop in ANC. Even if there is a "rush" and something DESPERATELY needs to make it 11,000 miles overnight, chances are its going to get chucked on a pax flight anyway. One exception to this is obviously FedEx, who loves their 777's, but thats FedEx. They just kinda do what they want and still make tons of money.
True the boxes and pallets don't care but the people sending and the people receiving do care.
FedEx does love their 777's but they aren't the only ones flying them and they didn't just buy them because the felt like it, it is an aircraft that works well for them and they eventually will replace the MD11 with them.
Quoting CZ346 (Reply 18): IMHO, when cargo operators purchase new aircraft , that plane needs to be able to strongly outperform ones in their current fleet (or just look really really cool . . . aka 748).
jonathan-l From France, joined Mar 2002, 494 posts, RR: 0 Reply 20, posted (1 year 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 14991 times:
Freight operators have always tended to favor a "one-size-fits-all" approach to cargo with large freighters. Although that worked until a few years ago, with pressure on yields from increased competition, with high fuel prices, that model doesn't seem to be optimal. I think Etihad has it right, mixing its cargo fleet among the 777F and the A330-200F.
They can address different markets more efficiently and don't need to slash rates to fill up 100 tonnes at every destination, every time they fly there.
XT6Wagon From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 3130 posts, RR: 4 Reply 21, posted (1 year 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 14793 times:
Quite the reverse. Its cost per ton of lift is great. The problem is that Airbus has A330 customers eating up all the production slots. So they are not chasing new A330F customers with slots they don't have.
Back when Airbus WAS shopping the A330F around agressively, It was quite apparent that you could get 3 A330F for the price of 2 777F. So unless you really needed that extra range of the 777F, you would get more lift and more flexiblity in your fleet for the same money.
Expect the sales of both A330F and 777F to rise as the passenger orders fall, and for thier sales to fall as passenger orders rise.
SEPilot From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 6258 posts, RR: 39 Reply 22, posted (1 year 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 14697 times:
I suspect that the lack of delivery slots in the near future has a lot to do with it. If you want a new build freighter, you can order a 767 and have it in less than two years or order an A330F and have it in, what, five? That has got to be big. I suspect the wait for a 777F is in the same range, but it is in a different class. It does seem that the 747F and the 777F have hit a sweet spot; and the A380F just didn't work, in spite of offering cheaper per ton costs. You would think that the A330F would have filled a niche between the 777F and 767F, but it seems to have missed for some reason. I am puzzled, as others seem to be as well.
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
CZ346 From United States of America, joined Feb 2012, 95 posts, RR: 0 Reply 23, posted (1 year 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 14671 times:
Quoting fx1816 (Reply 19): True the boxes and pallets don't care but the people sending and the people receiving do care.
FedEx does love their 777's but they aren't the only ones flying them and they didn't just buy them because the felt like it, it is an aircraft that works well for them and they eventually will replace the MD11 with them.
No I know, and I was by no means saying that the 777 isn't an amazing cargo plane. It is, and I know there are other carriers who operate them. But theres only about... 50 of them out there and 60 (?) backlogged. My point was a little more along the lines of this is a factory configured freighter aircraft that delivers a unique performance to a cargo op - and we only have about 50 of them out and about 130 orders (only about 50-60 delivered). I don't think that the 332F offers the performance standard beneficial enough to entice cargo operators to purchase a new aircraft like the 777 does.
Quoting fx1816 (Reply 19): Is this supposed to be a serious statement?
Yes and no. The 748 only being used by cargo part of it absolutely not. The 748 provides a LOAD of advantages that other similar type a/c don't. But the part about new cargo type aircraft needing to severely out perform others in class is obviously true. The 777F and 748F do that though. The 332F does not.
scbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 11360 posts, RR: 50 Reply 24, posted (1 year 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 14606 times:
Quoting Stitch (Reply 1): They have secured 60 orders for the type through the end of December 2011, which is quite respectable.
And two more already this year.
Quoting Stitch (Reply 1): That's about half of the 767-300F's
Which has been on offer significantly longer than the A330F. Before FedEx ordered 767Fs recently, the A330F was stacking up very well against the 767F.
Quoting migair54 (Reply 11): Is it possible to convert the current A330 planes to A330F??
Not yet, and that's possibly another piece of the puzzle that might be damping down sales. I believe the lack of a P2F option for the A330 was a factor in FedEx's decision to order 767Fs. It's certainly a factor for QR - we know that because I seem to remember Al-Baker mentioning it! However, my personal opinion is that the pax version is in such high demand right now that I don't think a P2F option would seriously hamper A330F sales because so few would be available.
Four more years!
25 Daysleeper: I think it's as simple as that. With demand for the passenger version still extremely strong they don't have any reason to sell it cheap. As for the
26 Revelation: My understanding was that also the A330F's wingspan caused it to fall outside of FedEx's current widebody parking spots. Our friends in purple sure d
27 KC135TopBoom: Sorry, I'm not buying the lack of A-330 production slots for the poor showing of A-330F sales. If FedEx had ordered the A-330F instead of the B-767F,
28 Stitch: And yet that it has sold half as many frames in such a short period of time looks to me to be a sign that this market niche does exist and that there
29 Daysleeper: Your not? Im shocked. It's not only the lack of available slots, it's price too. Since 2004 there have been over 700 orders for the A330 compared to
30 rfields5421: The A330F wingspan is 12.7M / 41 ft 9 in - larger than the B763F. It is 9.9M / 32 ft 6 in larger wingspan than the DC-10-30 - if you are talking abou
31 SEPilot: Perhaps Airbus is just simply less interested in the cargo market than Boeing. Note that the only P2F program supported by Airbus seems to be the A300
32 Roseflyer: UPS is rather committed to the 767. They have been operating the type for quite a while. Recently they went for the 747-400. I don't think they have
33 YULWinterSkies: I guess one can argue that the A330F is better suited for shorter routes, such as transcon, on which the extra weight of the 777F is hurting its fuel
34 jtdieffen: At the risk of being drawn and quartered, I have to say that I whole-heartedly agree with KC135TopBoom. While I understand taking the long view of th
35 Daysleeper: Its ridiculous to compare the A330 to the 777, as for the rest of it - Put simply 111 sales in 19 years, compared to 60 in 5, it speaks for its self.
36 jtdieffen: How is it any more ridiculous than comparing the 767 to the A330, which you have done several times? In terms of payload going up from 767 to A330 to
37 BMI727: You have to give some historical context to the A330F. It was launched with an order in 2007 which was before the market crash, a time when fuel was
38 crownvic: Do you folks on this forum really believe that passenger demand for the A332 has forced Airbus to just toss the A332F aside or prevent potential sales
39 Viscount724: Check your facts. The 777F program was launched less than 7 years ago, May 2005, not 19 years. http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2005/q2/nr_050524g
40 rotating14: Hhmnmm ........... can anybody supply any additional information about the A359?? Is it just a pipe dream or something worth the effort of discussion.
41 rotating14: *** sorry for the grammatical error *** I meant to say that there has to be a reason why Airbus has NOT swung a bat at the p2f segment.
42 scbriml: He was comparing the A330F to the 767F, not the 777F. Plenty of people have been serious and explained a number of reasons why A330F sales are where
43 Daysleeper: My understanding from various sources is that package operators such as FedEx, UPS, DHL etc tend to be volume limited due to the relatively low weigh
44 par13del: Well, Airbus had orders for the A380 and the A380F, and due to problems getting the A380 pax version into service they delayed the entry of the A380F
45 InsideMan: you can't look only at A330F sales without looking at A330-200 and A330-300 pax sales. The line is the same and production is limited. If you can make
46 Stitch: We believe it because Airbus have publicly stated so. But hey, they just make the darn things, so why should we take their word for it? Lack of feed
47 fx1816: Take into account however, that in the 1990's it was much cheaper and easier to acquire older DC-10's and DC-8's for cargo operations. So yes the 767
48 747400sp: From my understanding, the A332F is an ideal DC-10F and DC-8F replacement. From what I read, It looked like Arrow Air was looking to replace their DC-
49 travelhound: For every P2F A330 conversion you are creating demand for a replacement passenger aircraft in the same segment. At this point of time and when consid
50 trevd: This airplane has been somewhat a disaster frankly. If you look at all the orders booked and how many actually delivered or likely to deliver as freig
51 scbriml: It's a new variant of one of the most successful widebody aircraft ever flown. Disaster?
52 PM: That's simply not true. A few have, not "almost all". MNG, I have no idea. Tampa (ie Avianca) only placed the order a few months ago so I'd say they
53 crownvic: Because Airbus said so? Oh, that must answer everything. When I last checked, Boeing, GM, Spirit and everyone else also "says so"...My friend, the mi
54 nz2: Yeah right.....how is that???? Again another own goal....
55 PM: I thought I'd add some facts to this discussion. As of the end of January 2012, Airbus had sold 94 A330Fs. (Bear with me!) Of these, 20 have been canc
56 PM: Because there is a backlog of 52 and at the current rate of deliveries that may take up to a decade to clear. Because although it is selling slowly i
57 astuteman: Facts don't belong on this thread, my friend. There are better places to address your posting IMO Rgds
58 PM: A case of hope over experience. Forgive me!
59 nz2: Because it is an inferior product to the competition.... See the A340, the A350, the A380F......... The fact that the cabins are too narrow and thus
60 PM: It's actually in a niche rather by itself. What do you consider to be the competition and why is the A330F "inferior"? I'm trying to follow you... My
61 nz2: Sorry, I thought it was obvious. the A350 was discarded as a failure to read the market, hence the A350 XWB or whatever handle they apply to it these
62 PM: D'you know, I'm getting the impression that you are not an Airbus fan. Nor do you seem to inhabit the real world. I think this correspondence is clos
63 Daysleeper: I’m puzzled as to what you base this on. The only thing we can do to gain an insight on how well a program is doing is to compare it to previous on
64 KC135TopBoom: No, but they do operate the MD-11F, B-744F/BCF, and B-777F No, it does not. The B-767F was launched in 1993 with an order of about 30 from UPS. Back
65 srbmod: At this point, the discussion has veered well off of the initial discussion and will now be locked. Any posts that appear after this locking message w
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined May 2001, 3289 posts, 
From India, joined Feb 2005, 6715 posts, 
From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 21483 posts, 
From Spain, joined Jun 2007, 1277 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2006, 3254 posts, 
From Germany, joined Nov 2006, 4248 posts, 
From France, joined Mar 2002, 494 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
