LanPeru From Peru, joined Jun 2001, 645 posts, RR: 9 Posted (12 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 3155 times:
I have seen some airlines that operate the MD-11Combi and the 747Combi (KLM), does anyone know if the 777Combi will ever be available? I think that it would be a good idea for routes which require the capacity of a 767-300ER (passenger-wise) and the cargo capacity of say a 767F. I think that This would be a good idea, but then again that is just me. 777Man any help here?
Shaun3000 From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 445 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (12 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 3094 times:
From what I have read on this post, it seems unlikely. 777s are expensive and the airlines try to maximize their profits from them by filling them up with pax. However, they can be converted to all cargo, though this, too, seems unlikely. 767s, 747s, and MD-10/11s already exist in combi models and are generally cheaper than a 777. Most will stick with this and leave the 777 to passenger cargo, in my opinion.
AFa340-300E From France, joined May 1999, 2084 posts, RR: 26
Reply 4, posted (12 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 3045 times:
In response to the interest by Taiwanese carriers China Airlines and EVA Air in a 777 combi, Boeing stated in August 1995, that they could have this type available for delivery in 1997. The proposed combi aircraft would have accommodated up to 220 passengers, and a maximum of seven cargo pallets on the main deck, weighing up to a total of 83,600lb (38,000kg). Boeing had to decide whether to manufacture the combi directly on the existing production line, or complete the aircraft as standard 777-200s, followed by conversion.
The Letters of Intention (LoIs) placed in early 1995 by China Airlines and EVA Air were respectively for 4 firm orders and 4 options, and 8 firm and 4 options.
However by mid-1997, neither airlines had confirmed their interest and no doubt LoIs had elapsed.
China Airlines had a real requirement for the aircraft but eventually order the A330/A340 as it wasn’t ready to spend one year to gain ETOPS certification.
EVA Air had also a need for a this kind of aircraft, considering the freight traffic out of Taiwan.
China has made habitual aircraft orderings during every major political visit to and from the US and Europe. It was a rare opportunity for Taiwan’s President to “unofficially” visit the US, with whom Taiwan didn't have an official diplomatic relationship. So, he was trying to get as much as media attention as he could. Ordering some aircraft from Boeing would certainly help him getting more exposure.
Donder10 From Canada, joined Oct 2001, 6660 posts, RR: 21
Reply 6, posted (12 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 2990 times:
LH have some Quick Change 737s.
The thing about the 772 is that it has similar capacity to the 744M, but carries more cargo than the 744,although not as much as the 744M.It allows for a good load of pax and a great load of cargo while downsizing at the same time.
Airsicknessbag From Germany, joined Aug 2000, 4723 posts, RR: 34
Reply 8, posted (12 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 2965 times:
Well, I consider a/c that carry pax and cargo on the same deck as Combi or "M". Of course sometimes this may be achieved due to them being QC models.
As for the specific types/airlines I mentioned:
I´m not sure whether the a/c AS referred to as "737-200 Combi" were QC or not.
I´m not sure whether the RAF L10s´ configurations are changeable or fixed.
Four of the GAF´s seven A310s are MRT, i.e. Multi Role Transport - they have a SCD and can be converted from all pax to cargo/pax to MedEvac/pax configuration; so I guess you could call them QC if you wanted to. Their 707 were the same too, btw (except for the MedEvac).
And you´re right about RV´s Electras. They were indeed "LOM"s.
And what about this 727-100 operator in Northern Canada, Bradley First Air or something - didn´t they have 721M as well?
TWA@FRA From China, joined Nov 2000, 153 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (12 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 2951 times:
The most Airlines have stopped using Combis, so I think there isn't a big interest to build this. (Because of the different needs between Pax & cargo Service, as departure time etc...) But Boeing seams to do a everything to sell more 777 at the present, so it shouldn't be impossible - But in my opinion it wouldn't be used as much as the 747 Combi had in the past.
Also from my point of view as a Aircargo Forwarder - I do not like this narrower (therefore lower) Freighters and especially Combis, because:
-You do not get all Freight onto this lower Maindeck Plt`s, so if you have a big crate you often have a center load.(means you have to pay two Plt. positions)
- Also with the lower Maindeck Plt`s (MD11F for example ) you lose a lot of space because , also when you only have standard freight higher than 1,25m, you can't load them above each other because the max high is 2,50 m - means you can only load smaller Cartons on it. But the most Shippers don't care about that, but how to reach then the Pivot weight of 2500 kg
So please more B747F and also no more Combis, which normally can`t load all technical possible Freight in the back Maindeck Area, because then they would need
really heavy Lowedeck Unit`s in the front LD Hold to get the balance, but they are rare.
Broke From United States of America, joined Apr 2002, 1322 posts, RR: 3
Reply 10, posted (12 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 2929 times:
My company (UPS) had a specification for a long range wide body freighter which was filled by the acquisition of the MD-11. When we approached Boeing, they offered us various versions of the 747. At that time they would not provide any version of the 777.
I now understand that Boeing is now developing a freighter version of the 777. A combi would have to be able to handle the floor loading of a freighter (usually 150 lbs per sq. ft.), where the typical floor loading of a pure passenger airplane is 75 lbs. per sq. ft.
In addition to the design floor loading, the airplane has to handle an increase in the shear loads. A shear loading diagram breaks down the load showing the maximum payload weight for each segment of the fuselage. These figures include both the main deck and the lower deck loads for each segment. Usually the loads are highest over the wing and lowest at the forward and aft ends of the fuselage.
So, we shall see what Boeing come up with.
Ilyushin96M From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 2609 posts, RR: 12
Reply 12, posted (12 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 2894 times:
I think that if a Combi version of the 777-200 or -300 isn't in the works right now, it will be in the near future. There are airlines like KLM and SAA that have used combi aircraft in the past, are using them now, and will want to use them in the future. Boeing has shown pretty good response to markets for aircraft versions and layouts for its customers, so I think we will see the big ole side cargo doors on 777s in the future.
TransSwede From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 1000 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (12 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 2884 times:
There are airlines like KLM and SAA that have used combi aircraft in the past, are using them now, and will want to use them in the future.
No, I doubt it. I think the age of the Combi is coming to an end. KLM is replacing many of its combi's with 777-200ER's, and will likely replace the others the same way. SAA has gone Airbus, and is going for the A340-300/600 instead.
PW100 From Netherlands, joined Jan 2002, 2509 posts, RR: 12
Reply 15, posted (12 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 2850 times:
TransSwede There are airlines like KLM and SAA that have used combi aircraft in the past, are using them now, and will want to use them in the future.
No, I doubt it. I think the age of the Combi is coming to an end. KLM is replacing many of its combi's with 777-200ER's
FYI, KLM Combi operation will not come to an end. KLM now operates 20 744 of which 15 are Combis [and all 15 are being operated in full Combi configuration].
In fact KLM just took delivery of yet another 744M, increasing their 744 Combi count to 16. I also think that KLM has at least 2 [maybe 3] orders outstanding for 744M [beyond 3 744ERF on order].
The Jumbos that are to be replaced by the 777 [which you are refering to] are in fact the 743 fleet. 8 of them are still in the KLM operational fleet, 7 of them being Combi configuration with the SCD [Side Cargo Door]. The 744M fleet will keep flying in KLM colours for at least another 15 years!
It would be interesting to see if KLM will ever operate a 777M. If Boeing was to develop it, I would not be surprised if KLM would take some...
Immigration officer: "What's the purpose of your visit to the USA?" Spotter: "Shooting airliners with my Canon!"
L-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29802 posts, RR: 58
Reply 16, posted (12 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days ago) and read 2799 times:
As far as the old Reeve aircraft.
The two 727's where both combis, but as far as I know RV only had one set of quickchange seats. So the other aircraft had to be flown with standard seats.
Two of the three Electras would take Igloos, N1944C and N178RV, The third one lacked the large topside door. It was normally flown as a 66 seat, freight aircraft, bulkloading through the normal topside door, a total pain in the ass. It could also fly as 88 seat aircraft but the space between the forward main door and the cockpit bulkhead was still a freight section.
Combi aircraft are going to be increasing difficult to aqquire and fly, The reason is because of some of the fire contaiment regulations that where put into effect after a SAA 747 combi crashed in the Indian Ocean a few years back.
From what I have heard the FAA is willing to certify a new combi provided that it has a permant bulkhead, not the movable one that allows you to optimise the configuration. That behavior on the part of the Feds with probably be what kills off the combi.
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.