Navion
Topic Author
Posts: 1052
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 1:52 am

777F's On The Horizon

Wed Oct 13, 1999 10:30 am

Alan Mullaly of Boeing said the 777 would make an incredible freighter and he thinks it will come to pass sooner rather than later. What a beast the 777F will be!!! How about a 777-300XF?!!!! The volume alone is stunning not to mention how far it can haul the load. And as we all know, airlines are more willing to make a fuel stop with freighters (such as Anchorage for crossing the Pacific) since there are no passengers to complain. Imagine the tonnage a 777-200XF or -300XF could carry if you allow a fuel stop?!!! Those birds would be stuffed to the gills. I can't wait to see them come down the pike. I know I haven't discussed lower gross weight versions for domestic carriers but I like the heavyweight international stuff.
 
kaitak
Posts: 8944
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 1999 5:49 am

RE: 777F's On The Horizon

Thu Oct 14, 1999 5:03 am

Yes, I think the surprise here is that they took so long to come up with it. Of course, the reason was the MD11 was in the way. Now that this aircraft is out of the way, it's only a matter of time before the 777F comes along and yes, I do agree, it would be very exciting. I can think of a lot of Asian airlines - Korean Air, SIA, Cathay, Malaysia, to name 4 - who would probably be interested. United seems to have set the ball rolling, as it wants a DC10F replacement, and has actually challenged Boeing to do this.
There's lots of discussions about new types, but I would see this as being pretty much a certainty . . .
 
A340-500
Posts: 161
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2001 9:50 am

RE: 777F's On The Horizon

Thu Oct 14, 1999 6:42 am

on the same thought, what about an A340-500/600 freighter? they would have higher capacity than the 777 and a longer range. even though their fueslage cross-section is several inches narrower than the 777, they make it up in length by being able to hold several more LD3s after the stretch.
 
Navion
Topic Author
Posts: 1052
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 1:52 am

To:A340-500

Thu Oct 14, 1999 8:10 am

Good points A340-500 except I think the 777-200X/-300X have more payload/range than their respective A340-500/600 counterparts according to Aviation Week & Space Technology. However, I think the A340-600 would be a great load hauler as it has the internal volume (since freighters tend to "gross out" before they "cube out") and the thrust to do a great job. I would like to see the A340-600F soon. I don't think the narrower fuselage of the A340 would be a problem as the standard freight pallets already fit the A300 cross-section.
 
william
Posts: 1594
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 1999 1:31 pm

777 Freighter

Thu Oct 14, 1999 9:13 am

The only problem is,and you Boeing fans this something to think about. What the 777 freighter would do to the 747 freighter in stealing sales. I agree,the 777 would be an excellent freighter,and now is the time,since the alot of the 20 and 30 year old airframes the aircargo companies have now are increasing in maintenance. We see a shift to newer airframes,example DHL leasing the 757s.
 
User avatar
ravi
Posts: 254
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 11:04 am

RE: 777F's On The Horizon

Thu Oct 14, 1999 10:06 am

The A340-500 does not carry more LD-3 containers than the 777-200ER. The extra two container positions gained by slightly increasing the fuselage length are taken up by the larger wing chord and a larger centre fuel tank. As such the A340-500 LD-3 count remains at 32, same as the A340-300.

Also, the floor space of the A340-500 is with a few square feet of the floor space available on a 777-200ER. The cabin volume is still in favour of the Boeing. However, neither aircraft is capable of carrying two 8x8ft containers side-by-side as the 747F is capable of.

The point that the 777F may "take" sales from the 747F is a good one. However, with the MD-11 going out of production and airlines willing to operate an 80-90 tonne payload freighter, it is only a matter of time before Airbus begins to offer its A340s as freighters. By launching the 777F Boeing can get a jump on Airbus, and also maintain 747F sales to airlines who need the extra 20 or so tonnes of payload.

UAL requires up to 10 777Fs, and AFR is listed as a possible customer for the airframe.
 
Ciro
Posts: 639
Joined: Mon Aug 16, 1999 5:00 pm

777Fs? No Way, Jose!

Thu Oct 14, 1999 11:17 am

Unfortunately I have to disagree. I don't think it is economically feasible for any airline to buy a 150-million dollar plus aircraft to fly cargo. It is like buying a Mercedes-Benz car to deliver pizzas. Come on you guys... Where is the common sense?
The fastest way to become a millionaire in the airline business is to start as a billionaire.
 
CX747
Posts: 5576
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:54 am

RE: 777Fs? No Way, Jose!

Thu Oct 14, 1999 11:24 am

It has been reported that United is quite interested in a 777F. Boeing maybe hesitant though because of the cost of producing such a bird when the 747-400F is a hot seller.
"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
 
Ciro
Posts: 639
Joined: Mon Aug 16, 1999 5:00 pm

RE: 777Fs? No Way, Jose!

Thu Oct 14, 1999 11:36 am

Interesting... Where could I find an official source related to UAL's willingness to buy the 777F? I still sustain that such plane is not economically feasible for many reasons... I will be happy to discuss them, if necessary.

Regards
The fastest way to become a millionaire in the airline business is to start as a billionaire.
 
CX747
Posts: 5576
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:54 am

RE: 777Fs? No Way, Jose!

Thu Oct 14, 1999 11:53 am

I believe that it was mentioned in Flight International (a magazine). I also share your skepticism Ciro. Why produce a 777F when the 747-400F is selling like hot cakes and bringing in all profit.
"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
 
Ciro
Posts: 639
Joined: Mon Aug 16, 1999 5:00 pm

RE: 777Fs? No Way, Jose!

Thu Oct 14, 1999 12:01 pm

CX747, thank you for your support!   Many regards
The fastest way to become a millionaire in the airline business is to start as a billionaire.
 
User avatar
ravi
Posts: 254
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 11:04 am

RE: 777F's On The Horizon

Thu Oct 14, 1999 1:43 pm

Not only Flight International, but in UAL internal documents. The airline is interested in the 777F because it can somewhat amortize the costs along with the 61 777s it already has in service/on order.

The 777F would indeed be an expensive bird. Boeing is selling so many passenger versions at good market rates that another derivative would be an expensive proposition for airlines. However, Boeing must extend good will towards customers disappointed that MD-11 production has been terminated, and not everyone wants to fly 747-400Fs. Speaking of which, the 747-400F is currently the most expensive freighter available, and yet Boeing has sold 66 of the type.

I agree that a 777F, on the surface, is a very, very expensive proposition for just carrying freight around. However, the sheer capacity of the airframe will make it attractive to Asian operators. UAL, I presume, is interested because the 777F would be able to carry 25% more payload than a DC-10 with 10-15% lower trip costs. If the airframe could stay in service for 30-40 years - as would be expected - it would become a nice little earner for UAL.
 
Ruscoe
Posts: 1577
Joined: Sun Aug 22, 1999 5:41 pm

RE: 777F's On The Horizon

Thu Oct 14, 1999 3:55 pm

Jim Hartigan VP UAL said they are interested in 777F>

Ruscoe
 
Navion
Topic Author
Posts: 1052
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 1:52 am

RE: 777F's On The Horizon

Fri Oct 15, 1999 12:01 am

Alan Mullaly of Boeing said the 777-200F or -300F would be great freighters. I think he said that after looking at the market and all other business factors such as cost to acquire. Pricewise, the 777F may not cost as much as a pax version due to the simpler layout (although the cargo system would weigh and cost more). I think price and performance wise, the 777 isn't far from the MD11 which made a great freighter so I think it's very possible it will come to pass.