Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Airbus To Launch New Gen Beluga Soon?  
User currently offlinequeb From Canada, joined May 2010, 707 posts, RR: 3
Posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 27343 times:

It seems that Airbus will launch a new Beluga based on A330-200 in few months:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/124171922/New-Beluga

55 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinejetblueguy22 From United States of America, joined Nov 2007, 2808 posts, RR: 4
Reply 1, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 27319 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD MODERATOR

Very interesting news. The A330 is a great choice, one does have to wonder though why not the A340? I would imagine they have a couple A340s either sitting around or easily picked up. Perhaps weight wise it is best to stick with the A330.
Blue



All of the opinions stated above are mine and do not represent Airliners.net or my employer unless otherwise stated.
User currently offlinemayor From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 10512 posts, RR: 14
Reply 2, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 27335 times:

Oh, I thought the A380 WAS the design for the next generation "Beluga"......  


"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 12145 posts, RR: 34
Reply 3, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 27252 times:

Reminds me of this again:

Quote:
one does have to wonder though why not the A340?

Good question. One would think a second-hand A340 is much cheaper than an A330.

[Edited 2013-02-06 13:40:56]


Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlineBraniff747SP From United States of America, joined exactly 6 years ago today! , 2997 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 27216 times:

Question is... what'll happen to the old machines? I imagine there could be a market for them.


The 747 will always be the TRUE queen of the skies!
User currently offlineflipdewaf From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2006, 1577 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 27162 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting jetblueguy22 (Reply 1):
one does have to wonder though why not the A340? I would imagine they have a couple A340s
Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 3):
Good question. One would think a second-hand A340 is much cheaper than an A330.

The linked article states that the A340 would not meet wet landing requirements at Broughton.

Fred


User currently offlinediscovery1 From United States of America, joined Jan 2013, 25 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 27137 times:

Why would they stop using the old ones? I imagine part of the desire for more beluga's would be to support a planned production ramp up.

User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 12145 posts, RR: 34
Reply 7, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 27091 times:

The old ones will retire in 2025.


Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlineCPH-R From Denmark, joined May 2001, 6015 posts, RR: 3
Reply 8, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 27080 times:

Quoting Braniff747SP (Reply 4):
Question is... what'll happen to the old machines? I imagine there could be a market for them.

Retired probably. According to the linked powerpoint presentation they're scheduled to leave service in 2025, at which point they'll have been in service for 31 years. The mx costs are also set to rise from 2020, so they pretty much have to start thinking about their replacement soon.


User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 12145 posts, RR: 34
Reply 9, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 26915 times:

Quoting flipdewaf (Reply 5):
The linked article states that the A340 would not meet wet landing requirements at Broughton.

I see. Looking at Google Maps it seems impossible to extend the runway at the Broughton plant.



Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently onlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31124 posts, RR: 85
Reply 10, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 26925 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 3):
Reminds me of this again:

Bah. Go big or go home. 
Airbus A340-600ST Super Transporter Concept



I noticed that Page 5 states this new plane would be for the European network only and would not need to be able to reach the A320 FAL in Mobile, Alabama. I seem to recall the plan now is to ship the assembles to Mobile by sea?

[Edited 2013-02-06 14:16:53]

User currently onlineFriendlySkies From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 4113 posts, RR: 5
Reply 11, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 26849 times:

I'm curious if they will stick with the lowered cockpit/front end load design or go with a swing tail like the Dreamlifter.

User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 12145 posts, RR: 34
Reply 12, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 26790 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 10):
I noticed that Page 5 states this new plane would be for the European network only and would not need to be able to reach the A320 FAL in Mobile, Alabama. I seem to recall the plan now is to ship the assembles to Mobile by sea?

I noticed it too. Toulouse - Alabama is about 4000nm (source) and the Beluga XL should have a range of about 4800nm. So why can't it reach Alabama?



Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlinePugman211 From UK - England, joined Dec 2012, 108 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 26588 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I heard a rumor about Airbus designing a new Beluga sometime soon, based on A330/A350. There is the potential to extend the runway at Broughton, only at the south end I believe. A road runs at the end of the runway, but that could be re-routed. At the other end is a railway line, so that end will not change. Can someone explain more about the wet landing requirements for the runway at Broughton????

I believe the current A300 Beluga suffers from quite a bit of tech problems (what these are I dont know, everynow and then you will see a Beluga parked up out of service at Broughton), as the oldest frame is now nearly 18 years old. Also, if they didnt design a new Beluga, there would be alot of flights just for the A350 seeing as it can currently only carry 1 wing diagonally at present. So for a ramp up of 10 per month, you would need double the flights.

Will be interesting to see how this develops.


User currently offlineTWA772LR From United States of America, joined Nov 2011, 2195 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 26354 times:

Why don't they make an A380 Beluga so they can have a plane big enough to ship the A380 parts?


Go coogs! \n//
User currently offlinequeb From Canada, joined May 2010, 707 posts, RR: 3
Reply 15, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 26315 times:

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 12):
I noticed it too. Toulouse - Alabama is about 4000nm (source) and the Beluga XL should have a range of about 4800nm. So why can't it reach Alabama?

it can but it was not a mandatory requirement for the new Beluga since the plan is to ship the assembles to Mobile by sea.

Quoting TWA772LR (Reply 14):
Why don't they make an A380 Beluga so they can have a plane big enough to ship the A380 parts?

because they can't remove the second floor structural beams. The A330 deck height and length is (with A300) the only aircraft compatible with FLY10000 Facilities



[Edited 2013-02-06 16:00:28]

User currently offlineliftsifter From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 317 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 26280 times:

Quoting TWA772LR (Reply 14):
A380 Beluga

The new Beluga needs to be able to land at Broughton.



A300 A310 A319 A320 A321 A332 A333 A342 A343 A346 A380 B738 B744 B763 B772 B77W B787 Q400 E190
User currently offlinekalvado From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 491 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 26214 times:

And-setting pride aside - wouldn't Dreamlifter converted 747 be cheaper, since engineering and at least part of certification are already paid for?

User currently offlinequeb From Canada, joined May 2010, 707 posts, RR: 3
Reply 18, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 26177 times:

Quoting kalvado (Reply 17):
And-setting pride aside - wouldn't Dreamlifter converted 747 be cheaper, since engineering and at least part of certification are already paid for?

Please, read the document. 747 LCF fuselage (6.83 x 6.36 m) is too small for two A350 wing boxes (mandatory requirement). A330 XL fuse = 8.08 x 7.84 m

http://imageshack.us/a/img42/1089/beluga.png


User currently offlineSemaex From Germany, joined Nov 2009, 827 posts, RR: 2
Reply 19, posted (1 year 8 months 2 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 25325 times:

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 3):

A rather simple design study. If you look at the last A346 rendering you will notice that for starters a larger vertical stabilizer is needed.
But that's all useless speculation, as the A340 is ruled out per the article.

Quoting flipdewaf (Reply 5):
The linked article states that the A340 would not meet wet landing requirements at Broughton.
Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 9):
I see. Looking at Google Maps it seems impossible to extend the runway at the Broughton plant.

And even if it were possible. Look at all the political struggle nowadays with runway extension or build-up in Europe. Why go through all the hassle which may well take 10+ years of planning, lawsuit, building etc when you can design and build a plane that you're going to need anyways in due time.

Quoting Braniff747SP (Reply 4):
Question is... what'll happen to the old machines? I imagine there could be a market for them.

Like previous posters already mentioned, they will have to leave in about 10 years, but until then they remain a massive workhorse for Airbus.

Quoting FriendlySkies (Reply 11):
I'm curious if they will stick with the lowered cockpit/front end load design or go with a swing tail like the Dreamlifter.

Most probably. The renderings on the linked articles all show lower cockpits. First of all they already have the infrastructure and know-how to build and utilize it this way, and second, adapting a design that your main rival has thought of, knowing that you have a design which perfectly suits the mission, is rather pointless on a PR level.



// You know you're an aviation enthusiast when you look at your neighbour's cars and think about fleet commonality.
User currently offlinespeedygonzales From Norway, joined Sep 2007, 734 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (1 year 8 months 2 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 25035 times:

Quoting FriendlySkies (Reply 11):
I'm curious if they will stick with the lowered cockpit/front end load design or go with a swing tail like the Dreamlifter.

The will stick with the forehead door. In addition to what Semaex mentioned, the 747LCF needs special vehicles on ground to operate the tail door, while the Beluga is self-sufficient. The front door also don't carry any flight loads, making the structure much lighter than a swing tail.



Las Malvinas son Argentinas
User currently offlinebongodog1964 From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2006, 3638 posts, RR: 3
Reply 21, posted (1 year 8 months 2 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 24518 times:

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 9):
Quoting flipdewaf (Reply 5):
The linked article states that the A340 would not meet wet landing requirements at Broughton.

I see. Looking at Google Maps it seems impossible to extend the runway at the Broughton plant.

It has to be taken into consideration how important Broughton is to the local and national economy, around 6000 workers making it the UK's largest industrial site. If Airbus issued a statement saying "we need an extra 2000 feet of runway or the site closes and the work heads to Germany/France" the railway would be soon be in a tunnel.

Looking at the diagrams, one things leaps out at me, the proposed fuselage diameter is 7.84 metres, an increase not much more than 0.5 metres would take it to the stage that A380 fuselage sections could be tranported.

The other thing is that as the Beluga grows, it potentially becomes less efficient at its main job, transporting A320 sections. as the extra diameter serves no benefit.


User currently offlineLH422 From Germany, joined Sep 2010, 416 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (1 year 8 months 2 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 24188 times:

Quoting queb (Reply 18):
Please, read the document. 747 LCF fuselage (6.83 x 6.36 m) is too small for two A350 wing boxes (mandatory requirement). A330 XL fuse = 8.08 x 7.84 m

Makes you wonder how much of the A350 design was due to the dimensions of the Beluga.


User currently offlinequeb From Canada, joined May 2010, 707 posts, RR: 3
Reply 23, posted (1 year 8 months 2 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 24157 times:

Quoting bongodog1964 (Reply 21):
The other thing is that as the Beluga grows, it potentially becomes less efficient at its main job, transporting A320 sections. as the extra diameter serves no benefit.

But Airbus plans to manufacture 10 to 12 A350 per month. Actually, the A300 Beluga can only carry one A350 wing, the new Beluga can carry two.

Quoting bongodog1964 (Reply 21):
Looking at the diagrams, one things leaps out at me, the proposed fuselage diameter is 7.84 metres, an increase not much more than 0.5 metres would take it to the stage that A380 fuselage sections could be tranported.

Impossible. A380 outside fuselage height is 8.41 m. The cross section requirement is to carry A350-1000 Section 15/21. Don't forget that sections are loaded on a jig.


User currently offlinePlymSpotter From Spain, joined Jun 2004, 11672 posts, RR: 60
Reply 24, posted (1 year 8 months 2 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 24050 times:

Finally, this has been on the cards for years - I'd be surprised if the Belugas have enough in them to last until 2025.

Quoting flipdewaf (Reply 5):
The linked article states that the A340 would not meet wet landing requirements at Broughton.
Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 9):
I see. Looking at Google Maps it seems impossible to extend the runway at the Broughton plant.
Quoting Semaex (Reply 19):
And even if it were possible. Look at all the political struggle nowadays with runway extension or build-up in Europe. Why go through all the hassle which may well take 10+ years of planning, lawsuit, building etc when you can design and build a plane that you're going to need anyways in due time.

It's only an issue with the current runway, which is in an atrocious state and has very poor friction qualities - IIRC last year it was given a maximum of three years useful life left after a short term resurfacing.

Essentially when the last Beluga replacement plans were shelved the rational for upgrading the runway at Hawarden also disappeared, as the noises coming from Airbus at the time was that overland shipping would be used instead - later backed up by the decision to end Beluga services to Filton, now closed.

With Airbus now appearing to be committed to a new Beluga then it makes commercial sense to invest the many millions to strengthen, resurface and then groove the runway. The performance charts show that this upgraded and grooved runway would provide a suitable LDA in the wet. It may also be possible to increase the LDA slightly if, as I suspect, it's limited by physical obstacles in the approach and departure surfaces - by removing them, without actually increasing the runway length.


Dan  



...love is just a camouflage for what resembles rage again...
25 Pugman211 : Total runway length at Hawarden Airfield (Broughton plant) is 2500 meters. Yet, the LDA is 1650m? Could they not extend the LDA??
26 Pugman211 : Another thing to point out, Airbus also use the China Wing Transport trailers to ship a set of wings to the FAL sometimes. That could create less burd
27 Post contains images PlymSpotter : It's 2,043m x 45m. LDA for 04 is 1,663m. LDA for 22 is 1,743m. To allow regular operations it is the shorter of the distances which general calculati
28 Post contains images r2rho : From the linked powerpoint, it seems that the decision to build a new Beluga is a done deal and will become a necessity in some years (aging frames),
29 affirmative : Thats dry. And in the document the issue was with runway LDA in wet which is another factor of 15% (if my memory serves me right). So the runway woul
30 Post contains images PlymSpotter : In the case of Filton it was Airbus's wind down and virtual cessation of services, followed by the closure of the independent spray shop which lead t
31 Post contains images bohica : Any airplane built to fly A380 wings and fuselage sections would have to be a clean sheet design. The plane would be so large that it would make the
32 Post contains images rwood89 : The old machines (current Beluga) will remain in service until 2025. I noticed someone had mentioned that transporting Single Aisle wings in the larg
33 ytz : Just curious. Is there business case for this? Could these parts not be made to fit into a C-17 for example?
34 Post contains images bikerthai : Yes, but the Engineering and certification was paid by Boeing. I don't think Airbus can get the design mod from Boeing free of cost . . . maybe at a
35 Pugman211 : Granted, it does not happen very often. But has been seen to happen more in the last few years. Last time a Beluga went tech was due to a lightning s
36 Post contains images TriniA340 : Hmmm, maybe they can subcontract the An-225 to ship A380 parts? Is it big enough? And maybe they can get Antonov to complete the second An-225
37 queb : No, the cost of a C-17 is a lot more than a used modified A330 and the fuselage (neither C-5M or AN-124) is much too small for A350 wings and fuselag
38 Post contains links and images queb : too small, same cross section than An-124 Purple line: A330 Beluga Red line: A300 Beluga [Edited 2013-02-07 12:54:38]
39 Post contains images bikerthai : Or design a new breed of airship bt
40 kaitak744 : It looks almost big enough to fit an A380 fuselage. Why not make it slightly bigger to do so? Also, Boeing C-5 Galaxy??????
41 Semaex : Haha that would be kinda nice to see. But in all honesty.... if they are using 5 Belugas today which aren't enough to provide sufficient transport in
42 JerseyFlyer : No B777 P2F option being considered - I wonder why?
43 finnishway : Why would Airbus buy B777 when then can build their own aircraft? Yes, I understood your question, but it doesn't have anything to do with Airbus. B7
44 scouseflyer : Is there a plan on how the A350 and A400M large wing parts that are made at FZO are going to get to the rest of the Airbus network - road to BRS or A
45 breiz : The link was removed. Could anybody post the document again? Thanks in advance.
46 Post contains images PlymSpotter : Both, depending on the component and destination. Dan
47 rutankrd : If the runway at Hawarden (Broughton) becomes a problem again then EADS will have to resort to pervious strategies. IE roading up M56 30 miles to Manc
48 queb : I downloaded it before it was removed https://mega.co.nz/#!voAHmLhS!RniXwTrZbMLSj6DnvdCzWyOxYssOdRbN_Btwo-jQPz4
49 speedygonzales : A bit O/T, but I remember seeing pictures from an airport in the former DDR where there was a gap in the overhead line for the railway due to the pro
50 Stitch : Airbus could have purchased new-builds 777 freighters if it met the requirements... ...which it doesn't.
51 JerseyFlyer : This is a bit of a no brainer - Airbus already have the engineering in place to convert an A300, of which the A330 is essentially a longer - fuselage
52 moo : It's wide enough for the A380, but would have to be made a lot taller - in order to retain the best structural shape, any increase to accomodate the
53 antonovman : Well it may be a great plane but OMG its ugly especially with the lowered cockpit which i know didn't happen, fortunalty
54 Post contains images breiz : Many thanks . It sure helps following the discussion.
55 Post contains links india1 : FG reports Airbus are considering a 332 based Beluga, which corroborates something I'd read being discussed a while ago (on this forum?) http://www.fl
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...
Airbus To Announce New A340 Deal Soon posted Thu Mar 9 2006 15:43:00 by Flying-Tiger
Rumors from Airbus to launch a new program: A305 posted Fri Jan 2 2004 11:00:55 by AZMD80
United To Launch New Website And Perks For FF's posted Mon Sep 17 2012 14:43:49 by sdexplorer00
Japan Airlines To Launch A New Route posted Fri Apr 13 2012 09:41:55 by sailas
BE To Launch 6 New Routes For The Summer posted Mon Jan 16 2012 10:29:27 by Pe@rson
Alitalia To Launch New Destinations In 2012 posted Fri Nov 25 2011 03:36:51 by LIPZ
Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec) posted Tue Nov 30 2010 14:07:07 by Eaa3
FI: Gulf Air To Pick New RJ Vendor Soon posted Mon Oct 25 2010 10:58:39 by Dash9
Ryanair To Launch 7 New Routes From Rome-CIA posted Thu Aug 5 2010 03:55:57 by LIPZ
Airbus To Build New Higher Weight A380 Variant posted Tue May 18 2010 06:18:35 by aviationbuff
Airbus To Launch ''New'' HGW A330-300 (235T) posted Thu Nov 25 2010 03:51:14 by WINGS
Airbus To Announce New A340 Deal Soon posted Thu Mar 9 2006 15:43:00 by Flying-Tiger
Rumors from Airbus to launch a new program: A305 posted Fri Jan 2 2004 11:00:55 by AZMD80
ANA To Launch New LCC To Replace Air Asia Venture posted Tue Jul 30 2013 01:09:15 by LAXintl
Air Arabia To Launch New Services To Abha posted Mon Apr 15 2013 03:27:39 by ojas
Air Arabia To Launch New Services To Mattala posted Sat Mar 2 2013 06:00:25 by ojas
KLM To Launch 3 New Asian Destinations posted Tue Feb 12 2013 17:29:07 by GEsubsea
United To Launch New Website And Perks For FF's posted Mon Sep 17 2012 14:43:49 by sdexplorer00
Japan Airlines To Launch A New Route posted Fri Apr 13 2012 09:41:55 by sailas
BE To Launch 6 New Routes For The Summer posted Mon Jan 16 2012 10:29:27 by Pe@rson