Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
A380 Freighter, Is Op. Cost Lower Than 747F/MD11F?  
User currently offlineBobcat From United States of America, joined Jun 2007, 0 posts, RR: 0
Posted (12 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 2576 times:

Does the A380 freighter have a lower operating cost
than the 747F/MD11F? If so, how much lower can be
expected?

15 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineHkgspotter1 From Hong Kong, joined Nov 2005, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (12 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 2561 times:

I would like to see one of you answer this question in detail !!

User currently offlineYyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16335 posts, RR: 56
Reply 2, posted (12 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 2571 times:

This is a tricky question with many possible answers! Generally, all else being equal, larger cargo aircraft have lower per-pound operating costs.

However, the capital cost of a new A380 (as opposed to a new/used 744F/MD11F) combined with GSE, traning etc can tip the balance in favour of the smaller aircraft when you apply a reasonable ownership/depreciation or lease cost to the equation.

Fedex' rationale for the A380 (vs the 744F or addl MD-11F) was based on 3 broad premises:
1. The A380F capacity can replace 2 MD-11F while the 744F cannot. Hence their "true" operating cost comparison is 1 A380 (1 crew, 4 engines) vs 2 MD-11s (2 crew, 6 engines). While this may favour the A380 over the MD-11, it does not readily answer why the 10 ordered A380F's are a better deal than say 15 744F.
2. Extreme congestion and very limited addl slots at CDG, HKG, NRT mean that only the largest aircraft is feasible for long term growth. This argument is not strong (IMO) as Fedex tends to operate into most airports off-peak. HKG/CDG have runway capacity and NRT just opened a 2nd runway. MEM has no slot restrictions.
3. Exceptional discounts as the launch customer for the A380F.

Since the A380F will be much larger than the 744F, overall operating costs will be higher. At high load factors, the per-pound operating cost of the A380F may be higher or lower than the 744F....most likely lower when the loads are above the 744F limit (when operating the 744F would mean another flight).

IMHO
Neil





Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
User currently offlineBlatantEcho From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 1920 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (12 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 2534 times:

I thought FedEx was maxing the MD-11s in volume, but not in weight. The 10 foot ceiling in the 747 is nice, but only for large freight, not lots of little packages. In this case, the A380 will twice the volumetric load of an Md-11, all in one trip, and with less weight total. (two MD frames for the same load = more weight overall)

this is what I've heard at least. been wrong before  Smile

George



They're not handing trophies out today
User currently offlineSAS23 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (12 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 2482 times:

Without a nose door, the A380 is useless as an outsize freighter carrying the sort of long loads that the B747F can - and which get premium rates. Airports are going to have to invest millions in new freight handling infrastructure, and those costs are going to be passed on to A380 operators.

The A380F will carry 150 tonnes of cargo 5,260nm in range mode; and in cargo mode it can carry up to 158 tonnes just over 3,000nm. Airbus plans to offer airlines an optional 42,000 litre fuel tank that will increase range from 8,650nm to 9,650nm with a 66 tonne payload. Total volume is 1,134m3 (40,048ft3) - nearly 54% more than the B744F.

This aircraft has been designed for long range hub-to-hub traffic, and Airbus says that by 2019 50% of all cargo will be carried on such routes.

According to Airbus, the A380F costs more per trip but divided by the payload, costs 20% less on a tonne-kilometre basis.

From a personal viewpoint, having been in the cargo business for nearly 20 years, I am not convinced that cargo airlines need ultra-long range aircraft. Technical stops are not a problem for cargo, and there are very few (if any) ultra urgent shipments that would merit such treatment that are sent as cargo rather than being hand couriered.

Rather, I see an increasing trend towards frequency of service, which calls for smaller rather than larger aircraft. This is all the more evident since 9/11, when much of the world's B747 ACMI capacity has been parked.


User currently offlineUPS Pilot From United States of America, joined May 1999, 871 posts, RR: 3
Reply 5, posted (12 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 2426 times:

The correct answer will come in 2008. We'll have to wait and see.

User currently offlineJoni From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (12 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 2384 times:


SAS23,

In cargo mode at 3000nm range, is the A380F "ultra-long range"?



User currently offlineSailorOrion From Germany, joined Feb 2001, 2058 posts, RR: 6
Reply 7, posted (12 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 2349 times:

Joni: 3000nm where do you get this figure from? I don't know it, but trash that source.

A380-843F:
Range with maximum payload (150t): 5700nm
Range with maximum fuel: (90t payload): 8200nm
maximum Range (0t payload): 9900nm

A380-863F
Range with max payload (150t): 5600nm
Range with max fuel (90t): 8300nm
maximum Range (0t): 10200nm

MD-11F (PW engines, GE not much different)
88t: 3700nm
48t: 6300nm
0t: 8100nm

747-400
123t: 4300nm
63t: 7300nm
0t: about 8500-9000nm (off the charts)

747-400ER
113t (less than the -400): 5000nm
80t: 6400nm
0t: about 9000nm (off the charts)

747-400QLR
not data available yet

source: Airbus, Boeing
SailorOrion


User currently offlineSAS23 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (12 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 2324 times:

Joni, of course not - but at 66 tonnes and 9,650nm range it is!

User currently offlineUPS Pilot From United States of America, joined May 1999, 871 posts, RR: 3
Reply 9, posted (12 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 2240 times:

How can you provide these figures when the aircraft hasn't been flight tested yet?????? Can we say MD-11?????????

User currently offlineSailorOrion From Germany, joined Feb 2001, 2058 posts, RR: 6
Reply 10, posted (12 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 2199 times:

UPS Pilot:
It's preliminary data from the Aircraft Characteristics for Airport Planning Manual, section 3.

SailorOrion


User currently offlineSAS23 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (12 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 2205 times:

And my data comes from Aircraft Commerce magazine (April/May 2002 issue), originally sourced from Airbus.

User currently offlineOO-AOG From Switzerland, joined Dec 2000, 1426 posts, RR: 4
Reply 12, posted (12 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 2195 times:

Technical stops are not a problem for cargo, and there are very few (if any) ultra urgent shipments that would merit such treatment that are sent as cargo rather than being hand couriered.

It's true but you still save on crew (Flight duty period) when you can avoid a technical stop, you might end up with 1 crew instead of 2 if you flight direct.



Falcon....like a limo but with wings
User currently offlineSailorOrion From Germany, joined Feb 2001, 2058 posts, RR: 6
Reply 13, posted (12 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 2184 times:

Where does the 158t stuff come from? According to Airbus' manuals, this would exceed MZFW.

SailorOrion


User currently offlineN79969 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (12 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 2137 times:

I read somewhere (I cannot recall where) that the efficiency of the 380 is directly proportional to the length of the route. The article cited FedEx which believes that the 380 will be able to replace 2 MD-11 from say MEM-LAX or 4 MD-11 from MEM to Philippines. This efficiency could be achieved by saving on tech stops and ...I will just look for the article.

User currently offlineN79969 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (12 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 2130 times:

Amazingly, I found it. It is a great article:

http://www.aviationnow.com/avnow/autonomy_samples/autonomysuggest/autosuggest.jsp?docid=42649&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aviationnow.com%2Fcontent%2Fpublication%2Fawst%2F20010416%2Faw71.htm


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: "No Plans" To Drop A380 Freighter posted Fri Nov 17 2006 11:02:24 by PanAm_DC10
A380 Freighter Delivery Schedule posted Wed Oct 4 2006 08:11:20 by FlyingDoctorWu
A380 Dev Costs Including Cost Of Problems? posted Tue Oct 3 2006 21:19:42 by Art
What Is The Cost Of A Dead A350? posted Wed Jul 19 2006 08:11:27 by Art
Why Is STN More Popular Than LTN? posted Sat Jun 10 2006 19:25:42 by CRJ900
Jetways In DEN, Lower Than The 777? posted Sat Jun 10 2006 06:12:08 by Hamad
A380 Freighter Delayed As Emirates Switches Orders posted Mon May 15 2006 23:05:49 by EI321
A380: MSN012 Is Out Of The Hangar posted Fri Mar 17 2006 09:00:16 by AirbusA346
US E-Jet Pilots Lower Than Mesa? posted Wed Mar 1 2006 18:41:17 by 1MillionFlyer
SIA A380 Contract Is $8.6Bn posted Thu Nov 17 2005 18:49:23 by Astuteman