SXDFC From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 2042 posts, RR: 19 Posted (3 months 3 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 4551 times:
Hello All:
I remember awhile back seeing some pictures of a Q400 freighter and CRJ-200 Freighter, and would like to know if there are any plans on making more or new ones? One other thing I was curious about is how do you load cargo/ freight onto these planes when they lack a rather large cargo door?
BMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 14411 posts, RR: 26 Reply 1, posted (3 months 3 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 4439 times:
Quoting SXDFC (Thread starter): I remember awhile back seeing some pictures of a Q400 freighter and CRJ-200 Freighter, and would like to know if there are any plans on making more or new ones?
Not that I know of, but I didn't even know those planes existed. When it comes to small freighters it seems that the ATR and Cessna Caravan have most of the market covered.
One potential issue, at least in the US and probably elsewhere as well, is that one of the principle cargoes carried by smaller freighters was cancelled checks, which are now mostly processed electronically.
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
Paolo92 From Italy, joined Oct 2007, 83 posts, RR: 0 Reply 2, posted (3 months 3 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 4383 times:
The freighter versions of the Q400 and the CRJ-100/200 are designated "PF" (Package Freighter). Those are conversions of existing aircraft and are made by Cascade Aerospace on behalf of Bombardier.
Thomas_Jaeger From Switzerland, joined Apr 2002, 2278 posts, RR: 31 Reply 3, posted (3 months 3 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 4050 times:
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 1): One potential issue, at least in the US and probably elsewhere as well, is that one of the principle cargoes carried by smaller freighters was cancelled checks, which are now mostly processed electronically.
Not used anymore in many parts of the world anyway .
Quoting Paolo92 (Reply 2): As of today, the only existing CRJs PF are those converted for West Air Europe, don't know about the Q400 product.
There are also two CRJ-100 freighters flying for Estafeta in Mexico: XA-ESO and XA-SPO. So a total of five (three CR2s at West Air Sweden and these two CR1s).
5Y-VVU shown above currently operated by Blue Bird Aviation in Kenya is still the only Dash 8-400 freighter.
I guess it comes down to the fact that the operating costs of both aircraft types are very high in relation to the amount and type of cargo that can be carried. I guess both aircraft only make sense in a case where both speed and range matter, otherwise turboprops with lower operating costs and ownership costs (i.e. ATRs) make more sense.
Swiss aviation news junkie living all over the place
TZTriStar500 From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 1420 posts, RR: 9 Reply 4, posted (3 months 3 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 3836 times:
Aeronautical Engineers (AEI) is developing a large cargo door freighter conversion of the CRJ200 with interest in the 700 as well. They have collaborated with Bombardier and are close to launching it.
YVRLTN From Canada, joined Oct 2006, 2120 posts, RR: 0 Reply 5, posted (3 months 3 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 3834 times:
Quoting Thomas_Jaeger (Reply 3): 5Y-VVU shown above currently operated by Blue Bird Aviation in Kenya is still the only Dash 8-400 freighter
Theres a second now, 5Y-VVW departed YXX after conversion at Cascade 2-3 weeks ago, it went to KRT for operation by their Sudanese division, where I believe VVU also operates - heres a shot at the YXX airshow in the summer I took prior to conversion. According to the comment on my photo, VVX is now at YXX to replace it, so will be the 3rd conversion. http://www.flickr.com/photos/23870098@N04/7793051252/
MountainFlyer From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 378 posts, RR: 0 Reply 7, posted (3 months 3 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 3682 times:
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 1): One potential issue, at least in the US and probably elsewhere as well, is that one of the principle cargoes carried by smaller freighters was cancelled checks, which are now mostly processed electronically.
Perhaps many years ago the high value cargo was cancelled checks where speed was important and volume not necessarily as much, hence AirNet and their use of Learjets so much. However, there are many smaller cargo carriers that act as feeders to UPS and Fedex that is a fairly large business today, perhaps larger than the cancelled check industry ever was. Correct me if I'm wrong.
The feeder industry seems to rely pretty heavily on old (really old), smaller prop planes since speed is not as much of an issue on the shorter routes they fly. Probably the largest single feeder airline, Ameriflight, has over 150 prop planes.
I can't see any of the cargo feeders ever buying jets as they don't need the speed and cargo doesn't complain about props. Also, the majority of the feeders don't need planes as large as the Q400 either. At least one of the Fedex feeders, Empire, has a handful of ATR72s and a dozen or so ATR42s, but the majority of the cargo feeders use even smaller prop planes. Of Ameriflight's fleet, the vast majority are composed of the BE99, B1900C, and SA227 planes. There are a handful of EMB120 planes, and the rest are even smaller piston props.
I will be very curious to see what these feeders will find to replace all of these old props someday. I've heard rumors some of AmFlight's Piper Chieftains are getting close to 50,000 hours on their frames. They don't seem to need the size of the ATR, and there aren't that many small prop planes in those size ranges anymore.
AA737-823 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 5383 posts, RR: 11 Reply 8, posted (3 months 3 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 3656 times:
I would point out that the operating costs of the Q400 are too high for a freighter to be a very popular option. The ATR-72 has far lower fuel burn, because it flies slower. The whole pitch behind the Q400 was that it flies almost as fast as an ERJ, while burning far less fuel. While that's certainly true, there's hardly anything you can do with a Q400 freighter that you couldn't do cheaper (albeit more slowly) with an ATR.
BMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 14411 posts, RR: 26 Reply 9, posted (3 months 3 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 3630 times:
Quoting MountainFlyer (Reply 7): However, there are many smaller cargo carriers that act as feeders to UPS and Fedex that is a fairly large business today, perhaps larger than the cancelled check industry ever was. Correct me if I'm wrong.
I'm not sure about larger, but it's a major deal and a lot of airlines make good money flying for the large couriers.
FedEx has a couple dozen or so ATR-42s, but in addition to that have somewhere in excess of 200 Cessna Caravans for their feed.
My strong suspicion is that the replacement will be more ATRs, either new and converted, and a combination of smaller turboprops, likely a large number of Caravans, some Beech 1900s, and perhaps a smattering of PC-12s and other things.
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
yyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 15999 posts, RR: 59 Reply 10, posted (3 months 3 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 3574 times:
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 9): FedEx has a couple dozen or so ATR-42s, but in addition to that have somewhere in excess of 200 Cessna Caravans for their feed.
My strong suspicion is that the replacement will be more ATRs, either new and converted, and a combination of smaller turboprops
I agree. Plus converted Q200/Q300 and older Dash 8-100.
Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
YYZatcboy From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 823 posts, RR: 0 Reply 11, posted (3 months 3 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 3565 times:
How about as a 727 Replacement? I know they would not have nearly the volume of a 727, but could multiple CRJ/Q's replace a milk run 727 flight? It just seems like a 757 is too much aircraft for a milk run. Are milk run's still done by the big cargo guys?
Goldenshield From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 5490 posts, RR: 13 Reply 12, posted (3 months 3 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 3426 times:
It should be noted that FedEx started out using similarly configured (and much more fuel thirsty) aircraft. Also, I've seen DHL bulk load their 767s through the L1 door. Thus, a CRJF shouldn't be that big a deal, and like most cargo aircraft, should be rolling in the dough for its owner.
Two all beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese, pickles, onions on a sesame seed bun.
queb From Canada, joined May 2010, 411 posts, RR: 0 Reply 13, posted (3 months 3 weeks ago) and read 1091 times:
BBD announced today that it has entered into an agreement with Aeronautical Engineers, Inc. to become a Bombardier-licensed Third Party Supplemental Type Certificate (STC) Provider for passenger-to-freighter conversions for CRJ100 and CRJ200 aircraft.
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 2042 posts, 
From Italy, joined Oct 2007, 83 posts, 
From Switzerland, joined Apr 2002, 2278 posts, 
.
From Canada, joined Oct 2006, 2120 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
