AirFrnt From United States, joined Jul 2004, 2128 posts, RR: 18 Reply 1, posted (2 years 4 months 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 11529 times:
Freight isn't the A380s primary mission. It was originally the 747's primary mission. Hence the 747 is (still) optimized for freight, including cockpit location, bulk loading doors up front and lower structural weight.
Astuteman From United Kingdom (England), joined Jan 2005, 4498 posts, RR: 66 Reply 3, posted (2 years 4 months 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 11453 times:
I'm guessing Randy's figures don't necessarily mean a lot, as the A380F carries its maximum load 25% further than the 747-8F carries its maximum load.
IIRC at 5000Nm, the 747-8F max. load is down to 113t gross - a bit more representative comparison to the 150t gross carried by the A380F at that range.
Effectively, these planes don't even compete in the same market.
A
N328KF From United States, joined May 2004, 5221 posts, RR: 4 Reply 6, posted (2 years 4 months 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 11368 times:
Quoting Astuteman (Reply 3): I'm guessing Randy's figures don't necessarily mean a lot, as the A380F carries its maximum load 25% further than the 747-8F carries its maximum load.
IIRC at 5000Nm, the 747-8F max. load is down to 113t gross - a bit more representative comparison to the 150t gross carried by the A380F at that range.
That's fine and dandy, but the 777 Freighter carries a whole lotta load (similar density to 747-8F) about as far as the A380F.
When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' T.Roosevelt
TrevD From United States, joined Jun 2004, 311 posts, RR: 2 Reply 7, posted (2 years 4 months 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 11335 times:
Quoting Jonathan-l (Reply 2): Randy Baseler very conveniently leaves out the 1,400nm A380F range advantage versus the 747-8F.
Randy's comments seem to address structural efficiency, not payload range. And you also conveniently leave out the fact that the 1,400nm so-called range advantage is solely in design range, where any benefit to the A380F is limited to 8 lbs/cu ft. Not the 10 lbs/cu ft that every other main-deck freighter seems able to carry.
Already the 747-8F has out-sold the A380F to network freight carriers. The only useful role the A380F seems to have is as a low-density package carrier for the express carriers like FedEx and UPS who can benefit from the sole advantage it does seem to have - volume.
No other heavy freight carrier seems to find any advantage to the A380F - including it's 1,400nm range advantage. The only other A80F's ordered have been the 5 to ILFC who have the option to have them built as pax aircraft and Emirates who have 2 and have the same option which they have reportedly already exercised.
Do the math - if the ILFC and Emirates a/c become pax, total number of A380F's sold/ordered by heavy freight network carriers = 0.
787engineer From United States, joined Dec 2005, 572 posts, RR: 8 Reply 9, posted (2 years 4 months 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 11234 times:
Randy's statements are factually correct but he spins it Boeing's way by failing to mention the range, Airbus and their reps will spin it their way too. Live I've said before take each with a grain of salt and let the orders speak for which is generally the better airplane.
TIA From Albania, joined Mar 2006, 318 posts, RR: 1 Reply 10, posted (2 years 4 months 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 11182 times:
Quoting N328KF (Reply 6): That's fine and dandy, but the 777 Freighter carries a whole lotta load (similar density to 747-8F) about as far as the A380F.
Who was talking about the 777?
Quoting Astuteman (Reply 3): Effectively, these planes don't even compete in the same market.
Quoting TrevD (Reply 7): Already the 747-8F has out-sold the A380F to network freight carriers. The only useful role the A380F seems to have is as a low-density package carrier for the express carriers like FedEx and UPS who can benefit from the sole advantage it does seem to have - volume.
Ok, so let me get this straight. The two largest freight carriers in the world, UPS and FedEx, both have ordered the A380F. But according to you that's not good enough because niche carriers have not followed suit.
According to your flawed reasoning, the A380F only has volume as an advantage. Well by that same reasoning, we can also conclude that while the 747F might be lift higher payloads/body mass, the A380 has a range advantage. So the score is still 2-1 in Airbus' favor, not that I believe that any airline follows the same reasoning.
Quoting TrevD (Reply 7): Do the math - if the ILFC and Emirates a/c become pax, total number of A380F's sold/ordered by heavy freight network carriers = 0.
If airlines who have orders for the 747F canceled their orders, the new 747 would have zero orders, both pax and cargo. It works both ways, you know.
Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 8): Assuming that range is needed in the first place.
Assuming that you want weight over volume. As I said, this type of reasoning works both ways.
How hard is it to understand that the A380F and 747F have different missions, and airlines will pick them based on their specific needs.
N328KF From United States, joined May 2004, 5221 posts, RR: 4 Reply 11, posted (2 years 4 months 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 11150 times:
Quoting TIA (Reply 10): Ok, so let me get this straight. The two largest freight carriers in the world, UPS and FedEx, both have ordered the A380F. But according to you that's not good enough because niche carriers have not followed suit.
Quoting TIA (Reply 10): Assuming that you want weight over volume. As I said, this type of reasoning works both ways.
You have pegged the wrong carriers as "niche carriers." FedEx and UPS are the niche, not vice-versa.
When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' T.Roosevelt
Dhefty From United States, joined May 2005, 599 posts, RR: 2 Reply 12, posted (2 years 4 months 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 11150 times:
Quoting Astuteman (Reply 3): I'm guessing Randy's figures don't necessarily mean a lot
I'm guessing math wasn't your favorite subject. Would you care to offer some specific examples? For instance, what percentage of aircargo flights require the range of the A380? Range seems to be the only strong point of the A380 versus the B747-8F.
Would you care to comment on the relative sales prices of the two? As I understand it, the A380F is considerably more expensive. Does the added range justify the price differential?
Since a significant number of B747F's results from passenger conversions, what can be said about the ability to convert an A380 to an A380F?
Poitin From , joined today!, posts, RR: Reply 13, posted (2 years 4 months 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 11109 times:
Quoting Astuteman (Reply 3): 'm guessing Randy's figures don't necessarily mean a lot, as the A380F carries its maximum load 25% further than the 747-8F carries its maximum load.
IIRC at 5000Nm, the 747-8F max. load is down to 113t gross - a bit more representative comparison to the 150t gross carried by the A380F at that range.
Effectively, these planes don't even compete in the same market.
A
Yes, indeed, they do have different markets. The A380F is a great package airplane, which is why UPS and FED EX each bought 10. Cargolux, on the other hand is going for the 788F. They carry cargo like oil rig pipes and machinery. The front door is all important to them.
I don't see the 788F being a serious competitor for th A380F or visa versa. The A380F's competition is the conversions of old pax airliners like the MD-11 and soon the 777's and A330.
However, the range numbers being thrown around are misleading. Cargo doesn't care about a two hour stop at ANC, while pax does, so I doubt any of the A380Fs will have the optional fuel tanks installed and the space will be used for Aunt Tilly's cookie packages.
Korg747 From United States, joined Mar 2003, 549 posts, RR: 6 Reply 14, posted (2 years 4 months 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 11109 times:
Forgive me for my limited knowledge but isn't that 74 extra tons of the A380s a bit expensive to the cargo companys? I was under the impression that the airline or cargo carriers have to pay according to the weight of the aircraft when landing at any airport. or something like that? isn't that 74 tons costly? or it doesn't matter? because if it doesn't matter if the A380 is heaver and at the same time it has more range and a 5% of cargo then why is it not better than the A380?
My whole question is, is that added 74 tons of weight to the A380F a costly thing to the airlines?
Trex8 From United States, joined Nov 2002, 2539 posts, RR: 9 Reply 15, posted (2 years 4 months 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 11049 times:
Quoting N328KF (Reply 6): That's fine and dandy, but the 777 Freighter carries a whole lotta load (similar density to 747-8F) about as far as the A380F
per Boeing website 103 metric tones over 4965nm
from Airbus, 149-159 metric tons over 5600nm
even if you take the A380F range with a pinch of salt, they are hardly in the same category when one can carry 50% more payload.
Quoting TrevD (Reply 7): Not the 10 lbs/cu ft that every other main-deck freighter seems able to carry.
thats not true for many Asian carriers though which is why some airlines like CI are very interested in the A380 even though they will have the largest 744F fleet .LCD displays and semiconductor wafers are not very dense and thats most of the load they carry out of Taiwan. even finished laptops/desktops/monitors are not that heavy given the packaging needed to protect them.
the A380F will be a niche player just like the A380 itself but there will be some carriers who will find it very competitive vs the 747-8F.
N328KF From United States, joined May 2004, 5221 posts, RR: 4 Reply 16, posted (2 years 4 months 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 11004 times:
Quoting Trex8 (Reply 15): even if you take the A380F range with a pinch of salt, they are hardly in the same category when one can carry 50% more payload.
Yes, I know that, if the 777 Freighter can loft a given weight more cheaply than the A380-800F and fly it just as far, isn't it ahead of the game? OK, the A388F hauls 50% more weight. So is it cheaper to fly and operate three 777Fs than two A388Fs?
[Edited 2006-04-27 19:18:55]
When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' T.Roosevelt
Trex8 From United States, joined Nov 2002, 2539 posts, RR: 9 Reply 17, posted (2 years 4 months 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 10937 times:
Quoting N328KF (Reply 16): Yes, I know that, if the 777 Freighter can loft a given weight more cheaply than the A380-800F and fly it just as far, isn't it ahead of the game? OK, the A388F hauls 50% more weight. So is it cheaper to fly and operate three 777Fs than two A388Fs?
thats the 6 million dollar question many airlines are still pondering before ordering any new planes! 47890 gallons x3 and 3 flight crews/landing fees etc vs 81890 x2(probably less as at comparable 777F range the A380 will need less than full tanks) and 2 flight crews/landing fees(albeit higher) etc.
will be interesting to see how it pans out over time.
TIA From Albania, joined Mar 2006, 318 posts, RR: 1 Reply 18, posted (2 years 4 months 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 10902 times:
Quoting N328KF (Reply 11): You have pegged the wrong carriers as "niche carriers." FedEx and UPS are the niche, not vice-versa.
Please tell me you're joking.
Quoting N328KF (Reply 16): So is it cheaper to fly and operate three 777Fs than two A388Fs?
There is no single answer to that. Depends on the carrier and type of cargo, because it's not as simple as just 3 777Fs vs. 2 A380Fs. The 777F and A380F belong to different markets.
WestWing From United States, joined Feb 2005, 985 posts, RR: 0 Reply 19, posted (2 years 4 months 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 10845 times:
So, let's pick a specific city pair such as MEM / STN. Presumably it is possible to estimate the total annual cost of ownership & operation for a 380F operating a roundtrip say six times a week between MEM and STN with the max cargo payload for that range. And presumably it is possible to do the same for a 747-8F for the same route and it's max payload for the route.
So, if Boeing could do that comparison and be able to say that owning & operating the 380F will cost $26 million per year, but the 747-8F will cost only $24.5 million per year (both those numbers are made up, I don't have a clue what they really should be), then there would be some basis for comparison.
Sponsor Message: 
From United States, joined Mar 2004, 2508 posts, 
From France, joined Mar 2002, 390 posts, .gif){kind=small}
From United Kingdom (England), joined Jan 2005, 4498 posts, 
From Belgium, joined Dec 2003, 662 posts, 
From , joined today!, posts, 
From Albania, joined Mar 2006, 318 posts, 
From Korea, joined Jun 2005, 585 posts,