Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
A320F When........  
User currently offlineHAWK21M From India, joined Jan 2001, 31702 posts, RR: 56
Posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 5404 times:

When is the A320 series Freighter supposed to be built....Last heard plans was for 2012.....any update?.


Think of the brighter side!
29 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offline9MMPQ From Netherlands, joined Nov 2011, 316 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 5339 times:

Airbus dropped the plans last year citing strong demands for the passenger versions. Used frames are most likely to be picked up again leaving little frames to convert to freighters.

Your question did get me wondering though, would there even be significant demand for it ? Suppose it doesn't really matter as Airbus is making money on the passenger versions.



I believe in coincidences. Coincidences happen every day. But I don't trust coincidences.
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31387 posts, RR: 85
Reply 2, posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 5303 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I do not believe there are any plans for a factory-built freighter or convertible (like the 737-700C).

As for the A320 Passenger to Freighter conversion STC, that was formally cancelled in June of 2011 and the partnership with Russia's United Aircraft and Irkut ("Airbus Freighter Conversion") has been dissolved. AerCap, who launched the program in 2008, is working to place the planes they had planned for conversion with new operators or they will scrap them for parts.

The stated reason is strong continued demand for Airbus A320-200s has kept residual values high and therefore any converted freighter would be too expensive to be economically viable to operate against converted 737 Classics or 757s. A 1990 delivery A320-200 is worth $6.5-10 million plus the cost of conversion whereas a 1992-era 737-300SF can be had for $5-9 million and it's already a freighter. Now yes, the 737-400 is a closer match to the A320-200 in size, but you can get a 737-400HGW with EFIS for half of what an A320-200 of the same vintage is going for.


User currently offlineKELPkid From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 6428 posts, RR: 3
Reply 3, posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 5228 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 2):
The stated reason is strong continued demand for Airbus A320-200s has kept residual values high and therefore any converted freighter would be too expensive to be economically viable to operate against converted 737 Classics or 757s.

Bull. Now that Airbus has pressed forward with the 320NEO, I predict that older 320's will become parked by the droves in years to come  



Celebrating the birth of KELPkidJR on August 5, 2009 :-)
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31387 posts, RR: 85
Reply 4, posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 5219 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting KELPkid (Reply 3):
Bull. Now that Airbus has pressed forward with the 320NEO, I predict that older 320's will become parked by the droves in years to come.    

Airbus believes that A320neo deliveries will not materially impact A320 Classic values much before the early 2020s. They site the fact that 737 Classic values were not materially impacted by the introduction of the 737NG until 737NG deliveries had equaled 50% of 737 Classic deliveries.


User currently offlineKELPkid From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 6428 posts, RR: 3
Reply 5, posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 5189 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 4):
Airbus believes that A320neo deliveries will not materially impact A320 Classic values much before the early 2020s. They site the fact that 737 Classic values were not materially impacted by the introduction of the 737NG until 737NG deliveries had equaled 50% of 737 Classic deliveries.

However-there are a few key points here:
1) The NG's weren't that much more fuel effecient than the classics, but they did offer much improved range
2) the NEO is a quantum leap in engine effeciency compared to the current A320 series, and as I understand it, range goes up in the 320NEO as a natural consequence of the reenginning.

Also, the leasing companies are whining at both Boeing and Airbus over the current narrow body production rates, because lease rates are way down due to a glut of new production aircraft.



Celebrating the birth of KELPkidJR on August 5, 2009 :-)
User currently offlineAirframeAS From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 14150 posts, RR: 24
Reply 6, posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 5184 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 2):
I do not believe there are any plans for a factory-built freighter or convertible (like the 737-700C).

Doing the convertible versions, the FAA had decided at some point long ago,. not to certify anymore of them. This is why AS was required to have their half and half 734's in fixed position to the point to where you cannot move the bulkheads.



A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
User currently offlineHAWK21M From India, joined Jan 2001, 31702 posts, RR: 56
Reply 7, posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 5166 times:

I find it strange that there is no Freighter conversion done on an A320 series type yet.....The reasons of costs probably is the tilting factor.
But considering the demand for freighters,I would have though there would be a market for the type globally.



Think of the brighter side!
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31387 posts, RR: 85
Reply 8, posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 4988 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 6):
Doing the convertible versions, the FAA had decided at some point long ago,. not to certify anymore of them.

As a convertible, the 737-700C can be configured either in an all-cargo or an all-passenger layout as necessary by a carrier. It is not designed to be used in a combi configuration - part passenger and part cargo.


User currently offlineAirframeAS From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 14150 posts, RR: 24
Reply 9, posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 4926 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 8):
As a convertible, the 737-700C can be configured either in an all-cargo or an all-passenger layout as necessary by a carrier. It is not designed to be used in a combi configuration - part passenger and part cargo.

What I meant was, the FAA will not certify any new aircraft (or any 2nd hand, for that matter) to be converted from a full pax to a combi, to turn it to a half pax half cargo and full cargo and full pax interchangeable (Like what AS 732's had) anymore. Now they are required to have a fixed bulkhead. Some of the AS 734 combi is now set up this way: Half pax, half cargo through and through.



A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
User currently offlineHAWK21M From India, joined Jan 2001, 31702 posts, RR: 56
Reply 10, posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 4767 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 8):
As a convertible, the 737-700C can be configured either in an all-cargo or an all-passenger layout as necessary by a carrier. It is not designed to be used in a combi configuration - part passenger and part cargo.

That would be a -QC version [Quick change version] that was present on the B732.



Think of the brighter side!
User currently offlineAirframeAS From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 14150 posts, RR: 24
Reply 11, posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 4635 times:

Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 10):
That would be a -QC version [Quick change version] that was present on the B732.

Yes, thank you. It has been a long time since I have used that term, let alone being on a 732QC. The FAA won't certify anymore airplanes that are to be QC's. They stopped that with AS.



A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
User currently offlinedoug_Or From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 3441 posts, RR: 3
Reply 12, posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 4611 times:

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 11):
Yes, thank you. It has been a long time since I have used that term, let alone being on a 732QC. The FAA won't certify anymore airplanes that are to be QC's. They stopped that with AS.

I thought the FAA's problem was only with the combis. What is the problem with the quick change/convertible aircraft? The 737-700C came out after the ban on combis.



When in doubt, one B pump off
User currently offlineHAWK21M From India, joined Jan 2001, 31702 posts, RR: 56
Reply 13, posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 4432 times:

Quoting doug_Or (Reply 12):
The 737-700C came out after the ban on combis.

Is the -700C used as a combi or a freighter....



Think of the brighter side!
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31387 posts, RR: 85
Reply 14, posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 4420 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 13):
Is the -700C used as a combi or a freighter....

It's a "quick change" platform that can be switched between all-cargo or all-passenger configuration, depending on the need of the flight.

It is not certified to have a mix of passengers and freight on the main deck due to the restriction on combos without fixed bulkheads as noted upthread.


User currently offlineAirframeAS From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 14150 posts, RR: 24
Reply 15, posted (2 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 4248 times:

Quoting doug_Or (Reply 12):
I thought the FAA's problem was only with the combis.

The combi's are not an issue becuase it has a fixed bulkhead that cannot be removed. The AS 734 combi's have this now. They are not interchangable at all.

Quoting doug_Or (Reply 12):
What is the problem with the quick change/convertible aircraft?

I have no idea, I actually forgot. There was a thread on it awhile ago when AS had it's first 734 going through a major alternation to turn it from a full pax to a combi.

Quoting doug_Or (Reply 12):
The 737-700C came out after the ban on combis.

You have that backwards. There is no ban on combis. The FAA will not certify another aircraft as a QC.



A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
User currently offlinedoug_Or From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 3441 posts, RR: 3
Reply 16, posted (2 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 4149 times:

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 15):

I should have been more clear. What I should have stated was moveable bulkhead combis in both cases. I am aware of AS's fixed bulkhead combis, and believe Boeing even considered offering a fixed bulkhead 737-700 (think I saw it in AW&ST many moons ago).



When in doubt, one B pump off
User currently offlineha763 From United States of America, joined Jan 2003, 3670 posts, RR: 5
Reply 17, posted (2 years 8 months 1 week 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 4049 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 15):
You have that backwards. There is no ban on combis. The FAA will not certify another aircraft as a QC.

No, there is no ban on combis, but the problem the FAA has with combis is fire protection and smoke penetration from the main deck cargo compartment, which is classified as Class B, into the pax cabin. Because of tests done after SA295, the FAA came out with AD 93-07-15 (search for it as the link will not come out correctly in my post). AS obviously went with Option 4 in the AD to get the 734 combis certified.

As for convertibles and QCs that are not combis, it is a lot easier to meet the new regulations as you are not mixing pax into the equation. You are either carrying all pax or all cargo.


User currently offlineAirframeAS From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 14150 posts, RR: 24
Reply 18, posted (2 years 8 months 1 week 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 4030 times:

Quoting ha763 (Reply 17):

Keep in mind, the AS 734's are not on QC and are not even certified them to be. The FAA said no to the QC on the AS 734, IIRC. It is in a thread here on A.net somewhere, but I cannot find it.



A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
User currently offlineha763 From United States of America, joined Jan 2003, 3670 posts, RR: 5
Reply 19, posted (2 years 8 months 1 week 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 4002 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 18):

The FAA said no to a moveable bulkhead in the combi, not a QC. The QC is just an option for convertible aircraft so that it can be quickly changed between pax and freighter configurations. In a QC, you just remove the pallets the seats are installed on and leave the overhead bins. It takes less than 1 hour to change a QC between pax and freighter configurations and back. The 737-700C is available with the QC option. In a convertible without the QC option, the overhead bins are also removed, but takes much longer to change between pax and freighter configurations. The combi is just another option that was available for convertible aircraft.


User currently offlineAirframeAS From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 14150 posts, RR: 24
Reply 20, posted (2 years 8 months 1 week 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 3997 times:

Quoting ha763 (Reply 19):
the overhead bins are also removed

Not on the AS 732's they were not.



A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
User currently offlineha763 From United States of America, joined Jan 2003, 3670 posts, RR: 5
Reply 21, posted (2 years 8 months 1 week 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 3850 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 20):
Not on the AS 732's they were not.

Because they had the QC option. Boeing did not have a separate model series for the convertible, QC, or combi. It all falls under 737-200C. Even Boeing calls the AS 732Cs as combi/QCs.

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/news/feature/737qc.html


User currently offlineHAWK21M From India, joined Jan 2001, 31702 posts, RR: 56
Reply 22, posted (2 years 8 months 1 week 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 3823 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 14):
It's a "quick change" platform that can be switched between all-cargo or all-passenger configuration, depending on the need of the flight.

then it should have been named the B737--700QC & NOT -700C....any reason?.



Think of the brighter side!
User currently offlineHAWK21M From India, joined Jan 2001, 31702 posts, RR: 56
Reply 23, posted (2 years 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 3034 times:

Just noticed this thread while posting another one....

Will the A320NEO have the freighter option in future.



Think of the brighter side!
User currently offlineCargolex From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1278 posts, RR: 8
Reply 24, posted (2 years 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 3013 times:

Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 23):
Will the A320NEO have the freighter option in future.

Maybe in the far future as a conversion, but certainly not from the factory.

There isn't any market for new-build narrowbody freighters - although if the 757 was still in production, that might be a different story. The A321 NEO would lose considerable range and need more beefing up to do the job of the now-defunct new-build 757PF, plus, there's so much demand for the NEO that the line will be busy for many years building passenger versions.

Boeing does offer the previously-mentioned 737-700C, but there have been very few takers, in part because people who need a freighter can get a converted 733 or 734 for so much less outlay, and in part because narrowbody freighters have considerably lower utilization than new-build passenger aircraft. There isn't much of a need for a new-build narrow freighter when conversions cost so much less and do the job just fine. The -700C seems to be mainly used for specialty and government missions.


User currently offlineHAWK21M From India, joined Jan 2001, 31702 posts, RR: 56
Reply 25, posted (2 years 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 3091 times:

Cost does matter......If one is carry freight....The model could be older and available at a cheaper price.


Think of the brighter side!
User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 25983 posts, RR: 22
Reply 26, posted (2 years 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 3013 times:

Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 22):
Quoting Stitch (Reply 14):
It's a "quick change" platform that can be switched between all-cargo or all-passenger configuration, depending on the need of the flight.

then it should have been named the B737--700QC & NOT -700C....any reason?.

Boeing uses C for "Convertible" which is what the -700C is, either all passenger or all-cargo. If memory correct, Boeing only used "QC" as a marketing designation. I believe the 727 and 737 "QC" was technically certified as "C" not "QC". The 737-200C was also the "combi" designation, and a dozen or more are still flying in Canada as there is nothing else that can do the same job, including the flexible cabin layout with a movable divider and the ability to land on unpaved runways.


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31387 posts, RR: 85
Reply 27, posted (2 years 1 day ago) and read 2976 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 26):
If memory correct, Boeing only used "QC" as a marketing designation. I believe the 727 and 737 "QC" was technically certified as "C" not "QC".

According to the 727 and 737 ACAPS, "Quick Change" refers specifically to palletized passenger seating that works with a Convertible aircraft. So the basic plane is a 727-100C or 737-200C and then there would be the "Quick Change" seating pallets.

In the case of the 747-200C, which was a 747-200 freighter with passenger windows, cargo was loaded through the nose door and passengers were seated in the aft of the plane (the reverse of the Combi, which used a 747 passenger frame with an aft cargo door).


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Joop Stroes - Global Aviation Photography



User currently offlineSXDFC From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 2441 posts, RR: 23
Reply 28, posted (2 years 23 hours ago) and read 2946 times:

Came across this picture today, a 737-700(QC)


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Cornelius Saayman



Sorry if others have known about this, but this is the first time I've seen a Civilian 737-700QC..



ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
User currently offlineHAWK21M From India, joined Jan 2001, 31702 posts, RR: 56
Reply 29, posted (1 year 12 months 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 2576 times:

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 26):
The 737-200C was also the "combi" designation

The B732 had both the B732C & the B732QC.



Think of the brighter side!
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic A320F When........
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Tech/Ops related posts only!
  • Not Tech/Ops related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
Crew Q? When Flying East To West. posted Fri Jan 13 2012 10:35:38 by readytotaxi
When Do Airlines Publish Seasonal Schedules? posted Sat Dec 3 2011 08:24:35 by kl911
Arrival Runway When Planning posted Tue Aug 2 2011 02:27:32 by jackmidd
Strobe Lights: When Were They First Used? posted Mon Jul 4 2011 22:13:55 by 747fan
How Does A Pilot Know When He's At V1? posted Sat Jun 18 2011 06:51:30 by cvbcbcmv
When Are Props More Profitable Than Jets? posted Sat May 28 2011 09:34:45 by c5load
Pilots - When Are They Informed About Aircraft? posted Fri May 27 2011 11:27:33 by maddogjt8d
When Did Airlines Start Designating Doors? posted Thu Apr 21 2011 17:28:06 by Jackbr
When/Why Did TPA Change The RWY Headings? posted Sat Apr 9 2011 15:07:42 by goblin211
When To Ditch The Tug? posted Tue Mar 22 2011 05:44:24 by Chamonix

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format