Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
MD-11F, A Chance To Be Reborn?  
User currently offlineSterne82 From Belgium, joined May 2000, 397 posts, RR: 0
Posted (12 years 3 months 1 week 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 2269 times:

Hi all,

After having read in different magazines, that some freighter airlines are looking at the MD-11F for their fleet, Would it be interesting for Boeing either to reopen the MD-11F line or to design a full B777 freighter (a B777F)?

What's your opinion about it?

Regards,

Benjamin

26 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineTEDSKI From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (12 years 3 months 1 week 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 2246 times:

They will have to release a freighter version of the 777, because I believe they destroyed the tooling for the MD-11 after shutting down production at the Long Beach facility.

User currently offlineSAS23 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (12 years 3 months 1 week 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 2215 times:

The cost of converting pax MD11s to freighters is considerably less than the money that a new-build freighter would cost.

User currently offlineCx flyboy From Hong Kong, joined Dec 1999, 6643 posts, RR: 55
Reply 3, posted (12 years 3 months 1 week 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 2189 times:

I believe that there are still enough MD11 pax aircraft top satisfy the market at the moment. After that, the 777 will probably become a freighter. Emirates has already asked Boeing to seriously consider it.

User currently offlineBroke From United States of America, joined Apr 2002, 1322 posts, RR: 3
Reply 4, posted (12 years 3 months 1 week 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 2169 times:

We are adding converted MD-11F's to our fleet, but we are still looking for a larger long range freighter. Boeing, which was not interested in developing a 777F in the past, has appeared to have changed their mind.

User currently offlineUnited_Fan From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 7545 posts, RR: 7
Reply 5, posted (12 years 3 months 1 week 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 2160 times:

Certainly only the richest cargo haulers could afford a 777F. I'm sure smart carriers like UPS would rather pick up used MD11's . Like they did with thier 747's and 727-100QF's. Though,they did buy new A300's , 757PF's and 763's.


'Empathy was yesterday...Today, you're wasting my Mother-F'ing time' - Heat.
User currently offlineAFa340-300E From France, joined May 1999, 2084 posts, RR: 26
Reply 6, posted (12 years 3 months 1 week 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 2156 times:

Hello,

Boeing had so far declined to offer a 777-200F because the 777 was rather busy with the pax airplanes (max: 7 airframes/month).

A 777-200F would be based on the -200LR airframe, of which future is uncertain. There is a rather low market visibility for the -200LR, and it should remain so until the world's economies (and especially the US and Asina economies) soar again.

Now the question is: will the -200LR help launch the -200F, or vice versa.


[I will publish a small article on the -200F for those who are interested]

Best regards,
Alain Mengus
Air Transport Business


User currently offlineN79969 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (12 years 3 months 1 week 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 2134 times:

TEDSKI is correct. The MD-11 line is permanently gone because Boeing broke up the tooling. There is no way they will bring it back.

Boeing tries to market the 763ERF and the MD-11F impinges on those sales. I think that's why they took the irreversible step of destroying the tools.


User currently offlineKAL_LM From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 497 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (12 years 3 months 1 week 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 2113 times:

The MD-11F will keep on going until we run out of pax frames to convert as it is a great medium to long haul aircraft. Another reason I think Boeing destroyed the tooling was to make the take over of McDonnell Douglas a final permanent reality (almost a symbolic act).

I think that a 777F will be a long way off for a couple of reasons. 1. Current and increasing availablity of 744 aircraft for conversion, as they would be cheaper to convert than buy a new frame (as older aircraft come off pax service or are replaced with other aircraft). 2. Engineering difficulties that would have to be solved to convert to a freighter version. I'm thinking of things like floor strength, strengthing of the wing spars etc adn other assorted issues where freighters differ from pax. 3. Lack of a market.

Just my 2 cents worth.

regards,
Tom



is that a light at the end of the tunnel or just a train?
User currently offlineFlagshipAZ From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 3419 posts, RR: 14
Reply 9, posted (12 years 3 months 1 week 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 2060 times:

No, no chance of the MD-11 being restarted for production again. As stated by our fellow forum members, Boeing destroyed all the toolings for this majestic aircraft. They wanted to make sure that the 777 is a success...so why not buy their only remaining US-based rival & put it to sleep? That's exactly what Boeing did. The 195 MD-11s left in existence will most likely all be converted into freighters someday. The toolings being destroyed gave the MD-11 no chance of being consider by the USAF for a replacement for the KC-10 fleet someday. IMO, Boeing screwed up on this one. Just a sidenote here, but has anyone noticed that the wing on the 764 is almost exactly like the one on the MD-11? It made me wonder first time I saw the similarities. Regards.


"Beer is living proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy." --Ben Franklin
User currently offlineUnited_Fan From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 7545 posts, RR: 7
Reply 10, posted (12 years 3 months 1 week 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 2007 times:

Does 195 account for the 2 (?) crashes ?


'Empathy was yesterday...Today, you're wasting my Mother-F'ing time' - Heat.
User currently offlineSpacepope From Vatican City, joined Dec 1999, 2996 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (12 years 3 months 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 1944 times:

United Fan-

There have been 5 write offs of MD-11's. 2 FedEx, 1 Swissair, 1 Manchurian, and 1 Korean Air Cargo. Eva also nearly had a writeoff about a year ago on a hard landing. The aircraft was parked for a while without engines, but all reports are that it was put back into service.

I think that the market for these cargo aircraft is still strong. Fedex is working on scrapping a ton of DC-10-10 and -30s, and their 721 fleet is shrinking by the month. UPS has scrapped 2 747 (at least 1 100, don't know about the other), and L-1011s are hitting the chopping block like they're going out of style. Sure there will be 744s to replace them, but i have the feeling that with the retirements and the normal writeoffs that we see in the industry, you will still see a need for the 772F.

T.J.



The last of the famous international playboys
User currently offlineSpacepope From Vatican City, joined Dec 1999, 2996 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (12 years 3 months 1 week 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 1932 times:

Just for some tangible evidence to what I just said, a quick scan of my sources lists 34 DC-10 -10, -15, -30, and -40 series aircraft slated to be broken up. This does not include all of the -40s for northwest, but you can probably assume that with the amount of airframe hours on them (many either near or exceeding 100,000 hours) that none will find a home with any cargo operator.

T.J.



The last of the famous international playboys
User currently offlineUnited_Fan From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 7545 posts, RR: 7
Reply 13, posted (12 years 3 months 1 week 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 1917 times:

Sad to see DC-10's scrapped.  Sad L1011 freighters never caught on,either. I see 727 freights going away in less than 10 years. Many 727's will be in their 30's. MD11's are nice,because they're all under 12 years old,and require 2 crew.


'Empathy was yesterday...Today, you're wasting my Mother-F'ing time' - Heat.
User currently offlineSAS23 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (12 years 3 months 1 week 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 1913 times:

I think I can safely say that you can expect to shortly see a resurgence in the fortunes of the L1011 freighter market ... and plans for more conversions.  Big grin

User currently offlineAlaskaairlines From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 2054 posts, RR: 15
Reply 15, posted (12 years 3 months 1 week 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 1819 times:

That would be a great market for the 772F in a few years.

Now can I hear more about the maybe L1011F's? Who is interested ans so on.......

-Dmitry


User currently offlineCmchardyfl From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2002, 175 posts, RR: 1
Reply 16, posted (12 years 3 months 1 week 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 1786 times:

Hi all,

I don't believe there is any future for more L1011 freighters. As was said earlier, the L1011 freighter never caught on in the first place. Most aircraft currently in dervice are AT LEAST 20 years old and are few and far between. Airlines who would even consider using the aircraft as a freighter would be faced with large amounts of maintenance work, and usable spare parts for the aircraft are now becoming harder to find. These facts coupled with the the older 3 person cockpit makes the aircraft unattractive for airlines to buy as freighters.

On the subject of a possible 772F aircraft, I believe we shall see a new Airbus frieghter varient long before the 772F. Airbus has already considered the aircraft and with the success of the A300F, would be in a good position to introduce the aircraft. However, like is the case with Boeing, the A330 production is extremely busy which will also probably put a new frieghter varient on hold.

One more thing about the 772F causing Boeing to opt against it in the near future is the competition between Boeing and Airbus with regards to long range, large capacity passenger aircraft. There is no comparison between sales of the A330 and the B767 400, an area where Airbus is winning hands down. Plus there is the popularity of the A340 600 now being introduced, the incredibal long range capabilities of the soon to be introduced A340 500, and the large capacity A380 which is soon to be availabe, all areas where Boeing is going to have to work on to compete.

Anyway, those are my views

Cheers

Chris


User currently offlineSAS23 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (12 years 3 months 1 week 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 1754 times:

There's plenty of L1011 spares that can be salvaged from the nearly 100 parked aircraft - plus existing stocks. The cost of L1011 spares is a fraction of that of other aircraft such as the A300, DC10, B767 etc - because of the low to non-existent demand.

A three crew flightdeck is far better for cargo operations - especially for airlines operating to out of the way places. A professional flight engineer who also holds A&P or A&C/JAR66 licences can sign off the aircraft if it needs repairs ... impossible to do in a two crew aircraft, unless a 'flying spanner' is carried.

The L1011 is also far more robust than its competitors - again, something to bear in mind if you're operating in the back of beyond.

Other L1011 benefits over the DC10 include:

* Larger main door than the DC10 (3.9m x 2.9m vs 3.5 x 2.6m)
* The L1011's RB211-524B4 engines are quieter than the GE CF6-50C2 with lower emissions
* The L1011's operating costs are 20% lower than the DC10 on a kilo-for-kilo basis
* The L1011 has greater volumetric capacity than the DC10 (359.3m3 vs 321.2m3)
* The L1011 has up to 15% lower fuel burn than the DC10

Whilst the DC10 has a greater payload than the DC10 (67-74 tonnes vs 54-64 tonnes) and a greater range (max range 6,700nm vs 5,700 / max payload 3,600nm vs 2,850nm), these are rarely used.


User currently offlineUnited_Fan From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 7545 posts, RR: 7
Reply 18, posted (12 years 3 months 1 week 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 1738 times:

If an L10 is such a great freighter,why do only a handful of carriers use them ? Fine Air , Tradewinds and Kitty Hawk----not sure if Kitty still does.


'Empathy was yesterday...Today, you're wasting my Mother-F'ing time' - Heat.
User currently offlineSAS23 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (12 years 3 months 1 week 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 1728 times:

Kitty Hawk went bust and their aircraft are in storage in VCV. Tradewinds currently has the only operational one, a -1.

As to why it is unpopular - I have no idea, except that airlines generally want commonality wherever possible; or they want comfort in numbers.


User currently offlineAFa340-300E From France, joined May 1999, 2084 posts, RR: 26
Reply 20, posted (12 years 3 months 1 week 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 1730 times:

Hello,

I believe you got the point Cmchardyfl; Boeing will have to match Airbus' offer, if the latter goes ahead with the A330-200F. Althought, the two airplanes would have rather different payload performances, the A332F could win orders from airlines such as Emirates which are not ready to purchase a freighter like the 747-400F/ERF: larger, more expensive and no fleet commonalty.

Best regards,
Alain Mengus
ATB - Special "French Airlines"


User currently offlineSafetyDude From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 3795 posts, RR: 15
Reply 21, posted (12 years 3 months 1 week 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 1698 times:

Most of what I had to say has been covered, but here is one thing. Boeing will not have it name MD-11F  Laugh out loud
-Will



"She Flew For What We Stand For"
User currently offlineSafetyDude From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 3795 posts, RR: 15
Reply 22, posted (12 years 3 months 1 week 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 1694 times:

Sorry, that should have been Boeing will not name it the MD-11F
Sorry!  Smile/happy/getting dizzy
-Will



"She Flew For What We Stand For"
User currently offlineSllevin From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 3376 posts, RR: 6
Reply 23, posted (12 years 3 months 1 week 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 1656 times:

SAS23: Arrow also has a couple of L-1011 freighters; saw them at MIA in July.

Much of the current interest in the MD-11F's is cost -- as conversions from used pax aircraft, they are cheaper than new aircraft. I don't know that UPS, et al., would be so big on the MD-11F if it cost as much as a 777-200/300F (which a new one would).

Steve


User currently offlineSAS23 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (12 years 3 months 1 week 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 1644 times:

Steve, the Arrow aircraft are also non-op at the moment although N307GB is going to undergo a C Check shortly and return to service until the end of next year.

25 Browntailwhale : The L1011 ZFW is very low, that is a major reason it has not caught on as a freighter.
26 SAS23 : Browntailwhite - the max L1011-200F ZFW is 158,760kg (350,000lbs). That for the DC10-30F is 181,890kg (401,000lbs). However, as I have stated, the RB2
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...
The MD-80 Next To Be Mass Retired? posted Wed Jan 26 2005 00:13:55 by Jetpixx
Transwede Airways AB To BE Reborn posted Sat Jan 22 2005 18:05:12 by Sbe727
KLM MD-11's... Starting To Be Retired? posted Mon Sep 27 2004 17:50:08 by N754PR
Ansett Australia To Be Reborn posted Tue Sep 3 2002 10:11:36 by F27
Aircraft You Didn't Get A Chance To Be On? posted Sun Mar 17 2002 20:35:20 by Samurai 777
Lufthansa Cargo To Still Get 3 MD-11F posted Sat Jul 7 2001 20:04:04 by Godbless
Last MD-11 To Be Delivered On Thursday posted Thu Feb 22 2001 02:48:55 by B757300
Early 777-200 To Be Broken-Up For The First Time posted Wed Nov 15 2006 10:35:03 by Leelaw
Do You Have To Be Good-looking To Become A FA? posted Mon Nov 13 2006 18:00:46 by B777A340Fan
ACC-DUS To Be Launched By Antrak posted Mon Nov 13 2006 09:59:23 by Soups