AFHokie
Topic Author
Posts: 220
Joined: Mon May 17, 2004 3:29 am

FedEX, UPS And Others Buying C-17's

Sun May 23, 2004 10:49 pm

What's everyone's thoughts on cargo companies eventually buying C-17's? The thing is designed to haul cargo and on/off load quickly.
 
FlyingColours
Posts: 2202
Joined: Fri Dec 26, 2003 3:13 am

RE: FedEX, UPS And Others Buying C-17's

Sun May 23, 2004 11:01 pm

I was going to ask the exact same question yesterday!, I think it would be expensive to operate (fuel wise). Also I am not sure if companies/civilians are allowed a military model.

Good question

Phil
FlyingColours
Lifes a train racing towards you, now you can either run away or grab a chair & a beer and watch it come - Phil
 
pilotpip
Posts: 2820
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2003 3:26 pm

RE: FedEX, UPS And Others Buying C-17's

Sun May 23, 2004 11:10 pm

There are civilian versions of the C-130 hauling frieght around, the model is the L-100.

With all the widebody aircraft available on the aftermarket that have lots of life in them and can be aquired for much less than a new aircraft I don't see the C-17 a viable (but legitimate) contender for civilian contracts.
DMI
 
L-188
Posts: 29881
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 1999 11:27 am

RE: FedEX, UPS And Others Buying C-17's

Sun May 23, 2004 11:16 pm

Not going to happen.

The USAF even tried to help encourage airliners to try and pick them up for CRAF fleet use, but there where no takers.

Too slow, too big, too inefficent, compared to commercial aircraft.


And then there is the price.
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
 
jcded
Posts: 197
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2004 8:40 pm

RE: FedEX, UPS And Others Buying C-17's

Sun May 23, 2004 11:19 pm

Boeing is marketing the C-17 as the BC-17X to companies interested, problem is a lot of the systems were made to high military standards and the aircraft itself was made to fly beyond commercial flight enveloppes making it inherently more expensive. For going to remote airfields with little ground equipment this plane would be excellent for cargo operators but as most commercial cargo hubs have loading and unloading equipment a used 747/757/767 or A300 from the desert can do quite fine.

more info http://www.boeing.com/commercial/pd/bc17x/index.html

[Edited 2004-05-23 16:22:49]
You breathe to do good and have fun.
 
EXMEMWIDGET
Posts: 175
Joined: Sun Feb 01, 2004 4:25 am

RE: FedEX, UPS And Others Buying C-17's

Sun May 23, 2004 11:27 pm

There is not much of a need for overnight package companies to justify using an aircraft like the C-17. The vast majority of the cargo that FedEx and UPS carries are packages that are 150 lbs. or less. A C-17 would only be practical for tremendously oversized/overweight freight that a widebody couldn't carry easily. I would doubt that there would be enough volume of this type of air freight that could warrant the expense of adding another aircraft type to a carriers fleet.
 
HlywdCatft
Posts: 5232
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2001 6:21 am

RE: FedEX, UPS And Others Buying C-17's

Sun May 23, 2004 11:31 pm

A C-17 would be more practical in one of the adhoc cargo companies such as Kalitta or USA Jet, one that hauls a lot of heavy automotive freight.
 
DABZF
Posts: 1063
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2004 10:25 pm

RE: FedEX, UPS And Others Buying C-17's

Sun May 23, 2004 11:42 pm

I read some articles few years ago (before 9/11) that there were plans having C-17's leased out to cargo carriers during "peace time" and then getting them back to military service when situation so requires! Well, as situation is now I guess the USAF planes are pretty heavily used but I don't know if this concept is still alive!?
I like driving backwards in the fog cause it doesn't remind me of anything - Chris Cornell
 
Flying-Tiger
Posts: 3924
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 1999 5:35 am

RE: FedEX, UPS And Others Buying C-17's

Mon May 24, 2004 10:29 am

It's easier to take the way cheaper and better alternative AN-124... just go to Volga-Dnepr or Antonov Airlines, and you've the choice.

Regards
Flying-Tiger
http://fly.to/rorders
Flown: A319/320/321,A332/3,A380,AT4,AT7,B732/3/4/5/7/8,B742/4,B762/763,B772,CR2,CR7,ER4,E70,E75,F50/70,M11,L15,S20
 
m404
Posts: 1875
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2003 4:43 pm

RE: FedEX, UPS And Others Buying C-17's

Mon May 24, 2004 4:17 pm

The quote I'd read from either Boeing or the Air Force was that the civilian carrier would then have to buy tankers to get them to adapt to routes - not a shining recommendation.
Less sarcasm and more thought equal better understanding
 
cloudy
Posts: 1613
Joined: Sat Apr 06, 2002 3:23 pm

RE: FedEX, UPS And Others Buying C-17's

Mon May 24, 2004 6:33 pm

To top it all off, chartered Russian military transports do everything the BC-17 could do and do it for a lot less money. The Russians have the relatively small market for civilian use of military transport capabilities pretty much tied up.
 
VC-10
Posts: 3546
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 1999 11:34 am

RE: FedEX, UPS And Others Buying C-17's

Mon May 24, 2004 6:51 pm

No chance, a C-17 would bulk out before it got anywhere near its MTOW if operated by Fedex or UPS so wouldn't be cost effective
 
asteriskceo
Posts: 435
Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 12:42 pm

RE: FedEX, UPS And Others Buying C-17's

Tue May 25, 2004 12:19 am

They would only need a couple. They could add charter cargo routes where no runway is needed, the C-17's big thing is that in can land just about anywhere, and thats pretty amazing considering its size.
 
maiznblu_757
Posts: 4952
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2002 12:05 pm

RE: FedEX, UPS And Others Buying C-17's

Tue May 25, 2004 1:24 am

too inefficent

Exactly. They might as well take the C141's that are being retired. At least the 141 can make it across the ocean without being refueled.
 
AUAE
Posts: 292
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2004 4:41 am

RE: FedEX, UPS And Others Buying C-17's

Tue May 25, 2004 1:46 am

I agree with all the posts above, the C-17 is way to fuel/range ineff to be considered. (maybe they could sell a package deal with 767 tanker concept  Smile )

Along the same lines though:

IF the C-17 were stretched to make the aerodynamics better, and thus the range better, and if a mid floor was built in, would Cargo carriers be more interested?

Similarly, Cargo carriers seem to focus on buying freighter versions of pax aircraft. What would it take for a Cargo carrier to buck this trend and look for an airplane designed from the ground up to operate as a cargo aircraft?

I think the ability to resell the aircraft and the tremendous commonality between pax/cargo conversions is a big hurdle to selling an all cargo aircraft to the Cargo carriers.

Shawn
Air transport is just a glorified bus operation. -Michael O'Leary, Ryanair's chief executive
 
pilotntrng
Posts: 679
Joined: Tue Dec 16, 2003 8:13 pm

RE: FedEX, UPS And Others Buying C-17's

Tue May 25, 2004 1:53 am

Id like to know where you guys are getting the concept that the C17 is inefficient, too big, and too slow. I have seen that bird do things, that no other aircraft it's size could even think of doing. Such as doing a 180 on a taxiway or landing in 3000ft, or how about cutting all 4 thrust reversers in flight. That thing will go and land anywhere but on water. I love it and I think it would be a great cargo hauler for civililan use. It may reduce the fleet size of the comapnaies and therefore save money. Just my two cents.



Brad
Booooo Lois, Yaaaa Beer!!!
 
Hirnie
Posts: 465
Joined: Mon May 10, 2004 7:13 pm

RE: FedEX, UPS And Others Buying C-17's

Tue May 25, 2004 1:58 am

As L-188 said: Too slow,too big too inefficient..
As long as the AN 124 is available no company will buy such an expensive aircraft.But it would be very interesting to see a C-17 in civilian colours...
 
maiznblu_757
Posts: 4952
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2002 12:05 pm

RE: FedEX, UPS And Others Buying C-17's

Tue May 25, 2004 2:03 am

Id like to know where you guys are getting the concept that the C17 is inefficient, too big, and too slow. I have seen that bird do things, that no other aircraft it's size could even think of doing. Such as doing a 180 on a taxiway or landing in 3000ft, or how about cutting all 4 thrust reversers in flight. That thing will go and land anywhere but on water. I love it and I think it would be a great cargo hauler for civililan use. It may reduce the fleet size of the comapnaies and therefore save money. Just my two cents.

Just your two cents...

That was the only thing I agree with in that statement.

I sincerely doubt that FedEx or UPS would really need this aircraft to stop in 3000ft or do 180's on runways, or land on unprepared surfaces.  Yeah sure


You like this aircraft and its plain to see that you based your comments on your liking of this aircraft. Thats fine.

I kinda like it too. I do, however, know that it wouldnt make a good civilian frieghter, at least not in its current entity.

That is all.



 
Greg
Posts: 5539
Joined: Sat May 28, 2005 1:11 am

RE: FedEX, UPS And Others Buying C-17's

Tue May 25, 2004 2:17 am

It's prohibitively expensive to operate at a profit.
What can it do that a 767 or 300/330 freighter can't do? There are not enough short, undeveloped airfields to make it worthwhile.
 
AA717driver
Posts: 1502
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2002 8:27 am

RE: FedEX, UPS And Others Buying C-17's

Tue May 25, 2004 2:46 am

Welllll... Maybe FedEx could convert some of its MD10's to KC-10 standards and that would fix the range problem with the BC-17. Big grin

At least with the BC-17, IND wouldn't have to pave the third parallel runway for FedEx! Big grin TC
FL450, M.85
 
darrenthe747
Posts: 387
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2004 4:40 pm

RE: FedEX, UPS And Others Buying C-17's

Tue May 25, 2004 2:56 am

bottom line is civilian companies must use the most efficient airplanes for obvious reasons. c-17s are pathetically slow and guzzle fuel. i would be shocked if a company ever bought a c-17. another thing about military versions and civilian versions, a c-17 cockpit is not much different than any other wide body cockpit. i am in the USAF and no pilot has ever told me not to take pictures or not to tell anybody about the "secret stuff" in the cockpit. And when i go to airshows with c-17s there they allow civilians to go up with cameras and take all sorts of pictures (even after 9/11), so it is very unlikely that civilian companies would not be allowed to purchase the same version.
All animals are created equal, but some are more equal than others.
 
Vorticity
Posts: 324
Joined: Thu May 20, 2004 9:09 am

RE: FedEX, UPS And Others Buying C-17's

Tue May 25, 2004 3:04 am

It's like buying a Hummer to deliver pizzas. The vehicle is over-designed for what the commercial cargo companies need. One design doesn't fit all unfortunately.
Thermodynamics and english units don't mix...
 
adriaticus
Posts: 989
Joined: Thu May 06, 2004 3:29 pm

RE: FedEX, UPS And Others Buying C-17's

Tue May 25, 2004 4:26 am

<< The vast majority of the cargo that FedEx and UPS carries are packages that are 150 lbs. or less. A C-17 would only be practical for tremendously oversized/overweight freight that a widebody couldn't carry easily >>

Right about the C-17 being practical only for tremendously O/S weight. Normally, Express Delivery Companies (as they like to be called now) will carry items like animal cages, large engines, machinery, etc. using skids up to 119 x 70 inches. Larger loads can be accomodated using special skids - like for cars, for example.

So, just to add to what most of the posts say, it is practically unnecessary for EDC's to use an aircraft such as the C-17.

__Ad.
A300/18/19/20/21 B721/2 B732/3/G/8 B741/2/4 B752 B762/3/4 B772/3 DC8/9/10 MD11 TU134/154 IL62/86 An24 SA340/2000 E45/90
 
asteriskceo
Posts: 435
Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 12:42 pm

RE: FedEX, UPS And Others Buying C-17's

Tue May 25, 2004 8:52 am

think charter cargo.
 
ARCJET
Posts: 278
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2003 4:12 am

RE: FedEX, UPS And Others Buying C-17's

Tue May 25, 2004 9:02 am

"At least the C-141 can make it across the pond without being refueled"

I flew aboard a C-17 nonstop from Andrews AFB to RAF Mildenhall, England
and back again with no refueling.
Charleston, SC
 
US653
Posts: 160
Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2003 2:36 am

RE: FedEX, UPS And Others Buying C-17's

Tue May 25, 2004 9:07 am

I never had heard of the BC-17 before. Is there actually something on their website about it? I do remember seeing info for the MD-17 when McDonnell Douglas was marketing it to civilian carriers. Is the BC-17, essentially the same thing, or is it reworked?

Jeff
US653...PHL-AUA...The best place in the Caribbean!!!
 
m404
Posts: 1875
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2003 4:43 pm

RE: FedEX, UPS And Others Buying C-17's

Tue May 25, 2004 1:17 pm

I guess the best evidence against the (b)C-17 civilian version is that from the beginning the manufacturer has had feelers out to the cargo community asking if they wanted a civilian version. The thunderous silence must have been the answer none of us can argue with.
Less sarcasm and more thought equal better understanding
 
maiznblu_757
Posts: 4952
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2002 12:05 pm

RE: FedEX, UPS And Others Buying C-17's

Tue May 25, 2004 1:22 pm

Maiznblow
How original.

It was your opinion. Fact remains FedEx or UPS would never buy the C-17 in its current form because it is very inefficient.


 
cloudy
Posts: 1613
Joined: Sat Apr 06, 2002 3:23 pm

RE: FedEX, UPS And Others Buying C-17's

Wed May 26, 2004 4:55 pm

I never had heard of the BC-17 before. Is there actually something on their website about it? I do remember seeing info for the MD-17 when McDonnell Douglas was marketing it to civilian carriers. Is the BC-17, essentially the same thing, or is it reworked?
----
It is the same thing, with the military-specific gear removed. The main change is in the paint  Smile

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], Bing [Bot], deltal1011man, Dutchy, eidvm, euroflyer, fdx320loader, headlessmike, hma350, JU068, overcast, PanHAM, qf789, RohanDXB, scbriml, tlecam, travelhound, User001, ZK-NBT and 229 guests