NYC777
Topic Author
Posts: 5065
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2004 3:00 am

Airbus, Boeing Clash Over Jumbo Freighters

Sat Jul 22, 2006 12:35 am

A new battle is brewing:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060721/...transport_airbus_boeing_freight_dc

Fair Use Excerpt"

"The 747 is very emotional for Boeing. We are threatening their old monopoly and the idea of us potentially overtaking them on freight goes straight to the heart and guts of Boeing people," A380 marketing head Richard Carcaillet told Reuters.

At the Boeing chalet overlooking the display runway at this year's largest air show, Boeing's upbeat marketing supremo Randy Baseler believes he is already giving Airbus the benefit of the doubt in the way he runs the data -- and still beats the A380.

"Their plane weighs 74 tonnes more on their own figures. Our figures suggest 82 tonnes. We have a new wing design, but let's give them a slight advantage on the A380's wider wing. Our engine is four percent more efficient," Baseler told Reuters.

"A plane that weighs less, is about as aerodynamic and has a better engine is more efficient. They might choke saying it but they will probably admit we are more efficient."

Sitting inside the Airbus stand, Carcaillet is more fuming than choking but believes the unspoken rules of combat between the world's only large commercial airframers have been broken.
That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
 
RichardPrice
Posts: 4474
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 5:12 am

RE: Airbus, Boeing Clash Over Jumbo Freighters

Sat Jul 22, 2006 12:47 am

Both aircraft have their advantages.

Is the 747-8F efficient enough to put two planes on a route to carry the physical size of cargo the A380 can?

Is the A380 capable of carrying extra heavy loads?

Theres a difference between the aircraft, ones a semiartic hauling bulk goods, the others a lowloader hauling heavy goods.
 
DAYflyer
Posts: 3546
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 9:35 pm

RE: Airbus, Boeing Clash Over Jumbo Freighters

Sat Jul 22, 2006 1:00 am

More press who-ha. Two different aircraft for two different missions. The 747 will continue to be the king of the big frieght, and the A-380 will emerge as the winner in the Fedex/UPS small package freight business.
One Nation Under God
 
BoomBoom
Posts: 2459
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 2:26 am

RE: Airbus, Boeing Clash Over Jumbo Freighters

Sat Jul 22, 2006 1:35 am

Quoting RichardPrice (Reply 1):
Is the 747-8F efficient enough to put two planes on a route to carry the physical size of cargo the A380 can?

Does the A380F carry twice the "physical size" of cargo as the 748F?
Our eyes are open, our eyes are open--wide, wide, wide...
 
PlaneHunter
Posts: 6512
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2006 3:17 am

RE: Airbus, Boeing Clash Over Jumbo Freighters

Sat Jul 22, 2006 1:40 am

Quote:
"The 747 is very emotional for Boeing. We are threatening their old monopoly and the idea of us potentially overtaking them on freight goes straight to the heart and guts of Boeing people," A380 marketing head Richard Carcaillet told Reuters.

It's his own statement which sounds emotional...


PH
Nothing's worse than flying the same reg twice!
 
teixeim
Posts: 128
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:49 am

RE: Airbus, Boeing Clash Over Jumbo Freighters

Sat Jul 22, 2006 1:50 am

Gotta love the 'headline'/subject of this thread - what'd anyone expect the two giants to do - embrace the same solution? They're competitors for goodness sake!
 
jacobin777
Posts: 12262
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 6:29 pm

RE: Airbus, Boeing Clash Over Jumbo Freighters

Sat Jul 22, 2006 1:56 am

Quoting PlaneHunter (Reply 4):

It's his own statement which sounds emotional...

 checkmark ....I guess even the "non A.net" crew can get into this kind of "A" versus "B" vitriol.....which I find to be a bit.... dopey 

I say...."If ya' got a good plane mate, it will sell on its own...ya' don't need to be putting your competition down to make yourself feel better".... cool 
"Up the Irons!"
 
RichardPrice
Posts: 4474
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 5:12 am

RE: Airbus, Boeing Clash Over Jumbo Freighters

Sat Jul 22, 2006 1:59 am

Quoting BoomBoom (Reply 3):
Does the A380F carry twice the "physical size" of cargo as the 748F?

Did I say it did? Can you replace one A380F with one 747-8I?
 
boeingbus
Posts: 1509
Joined: Sat May 29, 2004 12:37 am

RE: Airbus, Boeing Clash Over Jumbo Freighters

Sat Jul 22, 2006 2:07 am

Look at Rnady's latest blog:

http://www.boeing.com/randy/archives/2006/07/weight_watchers.html

ends it nicely:

"So we're sorry if people get upset about our numbers. Our objective is to provide our customers the right data so they can evaluate our airplanes. And the outcome is that in the last 12 months we've sold 50 freighters. In the last 12 months the other guys have sold 10 freighters.

Since they launched their A380 freighter, we've had about 80% market share. And that's the bottom line. "
Airbus or Boeing - it's all good to me!
 
flydreamliner
Posts: 1928
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 7:05 am

RE: Airbus, Boeing Clash Over Jumbo Freighters

Sat Jul 22, 2006 2:12 am

Quoting RichardPrice (Reply 1):
Is the 747-8F efficient enough to put two planes on a route to carry the physical size of cargo the A380 can?

Is the A380 capable of carrying extra heavy loads?

Here's the thing. The A380 is not 2X the size of a 747-8. Functionally 50% more hold volume, roughly, sure. But it only carries about 7.5% more weight. Moreover, the A380F is structurally 80 tons heavier empty to carry roughly 9 more tons of cargo. A380 is not a good deal for weight, not a bad deal for volume.

Quoting BoomBoom (Reply 3):
Does the A380F carry twice the "physical size" of cargo as the 748F?
"Let the world change you, and you can change the world"
 
Aither
Posts: 990
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 3:43 am

RE: Airbus, Boeing Clash Over Jumbo Freighters

Sat Jul 22, 2006 2:46 am

http://www.boeing.com/randy/archives/2006/07/weight_watchers.html

Quote:
One funny moment broke up our extended technical discussion when one of the reporters pointed out that the A380 is perceived to be opening up a whole new kind of freight market - big quantities of cargo flown nonstop across wide distances. To which (I couldn't help myself) I replied, "You mean point to point?" That brought more than a few chuckles all around.

Maybe he should help himself a little bit. Every non stop route is "point to point". He reminds me Al Gore saying he had invented Internet...
Never trust the obvious
 
RichardPrice
Posts: 4474
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 5:12 am

RE: Airbus, Boeing Clash Over Jumbo Freighters

Sat Jul 22, 2006 3:16 am

Quoting FlyDreamliner (Reply 9):
Here's the thing. The A380 is not 2X the size of a 747-8. Functionally 50% more hold volume, roughly, sure. But it only carries about 7.5% more weight. Moreover, the A380F is structurally 80 tons heavier empty to carry roughly 9 more tons of cargo. A380 is not a good deal for weight, not a bad deal for volume.

That was precisely my point, each aircraft has its advantages and place in the market. To match the A380 for volume you would have to fly two 747-8s and the A380 cant match the 747-8 for high weight items.
 
eatmybologna
Posts: 375
Joined: Sat Apr 30, 2005 3:21 am

RE: Airbus, Boeing Clash Over Jumbo Freighters

Sat Jul 22, 2006 3:40 am

Quoting RichardPrice (Reply 11):
Quoting FlyDreamliner (Reply 9):
Here's the thing. The A380 is not 2X the size of a 747-8. Functionally 50% more hold volume, roughly, sure. But it only carries about 7.5% more weight. Moreover, the A380F is structurally 80 tons heavier empty to carry roughly 9 more tons of cargo. A380 is not a good deal for weight, not a bad deal for volume.

That was precisely my point, each aircraft has its advantages and place in the market. To match the A380 for volume you would have to fly two 747-8s and the A380 cant match the 747-8 for high weight items.

Because the A380F has a 50% greater volume capacity over the B747F, wouldn't the correct ratio be two A380F's to three B748F's? (2*1.50=3*1.00)

Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Regards,

E-M-B
Isn't knowledge more than just the acquisition of information? Shouldn't the acquired information be correct?
 
brons2
Posts: 2462
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2001 1:02 pm

RE: Airbus, Boeing Clash Over Jumbo Freighters

Sat Jul 22, 2006 4:47 am

Quoting Aither (Reply 10):
Maybe he should help himself a little bit. Every non stop route is "point to point". He reminds me Al Gore saying he had invented Internet...

Randy's humor is lost on you. Perhaps jokes are funnier when they have to be explained, but I don't think so.
Firings, if well done, are good for employee morale.
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: Airbus, Boeing Clash Over Jumbo Freighters

Sat Jul 22, 2006 4:50 am

Quoting RichardPrice (Reply 1):
Is the 747-8F efficient enough to put two planes on a route to carry the physical size of cargo the A380 can?

No matter how you slice it, no.

Quoting Aither (Reply 10):
Every non stop route is "point to point".

Yeah, you did sorta miss the joke.

N
 
brons2
Posts: 2462
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2001 1:02 pm

RE: Airbus, Boeing Clash Over Jumbo Freighters

Sat Jul 22, 2006 4:55 am

Quoting RichardPrice (Reply 11):
That was precisely my point, each aircraft has its advantages and place in the market. To match the A380 for volume you would have to fly two 747-8s and the A380 cant match the 747-8 for high weight items.

In my estimation, the problem for many cargo operators is that the A380F will hit MTOW before the plane is full. Average payload density is increasing, not decreasing.

However, the A380F should be an excellent package hauler for FedEx and UPS.
Firings, if well done, are good for employee morale.
 
PanHAM
Posts: 8528
Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 6:44 pm

RE: Airbus, Boeing Clash Over Jumbo Freighters

Sat Jul 22, 2006 5:15 am

Quoting Eatmybologna (Reply 12):
Because the A380F has a 50% greater volume capacity over the B747F, wouldn't the correct ratio be two A380F's to three B748F's? (2*1.50=3*1.00)

Only if you collect for the volumetric weight charge and really fill the theoretically 180 to 200 voltons of an A380F. That ideal situation will happen once in a while but it will not be the regular day to day load.

The 747-8F has the advantage over the 380F that it can be dlown to more airports because it can use the infrastructure of the 744F. The 380 can't, hence it is less flexible to operate. That is why CV bought the 757-8F and LH does not even consider the 380F.

Filling up 150 metric tons is a bigger problem than filling up 135 metric tons. Average yields are low enough and these extra 15 tons may be simply not worth to touch. For the regular FAK cargo carrier, the 747-8F is the better option.
powered by Eierlikör
 
WingedMigrator
Posts: 1767
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 9:45 am

RE: Airbus, Boeing Clash Over Jumbo Freighters

Sat Jul 22, 2006 1:08 pm

Quoting RichardPrice (Reply 1):
Is the A380 capable of carrying extra heavy loads?

Of course. The A388F is quite economical for carrying anvils, provided that you fly them for 5600 nm...

If you must abuse the A388F by flying 4400 nm segments or less, only low density freight will make it profitable. Otherwise it makes much more sense to fly a B748F, since its shorter range is better suited to the mission. This is of course what Baseler likes to dwell upon, while conveniently ignoring the range factor.
 
Johnny
Posts: 812
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 1:38 am

RE: Airbus, Boeing Clash Over Jumbo Freighters

Sat Jul 22, 2006 2:13 pm

Two airplanes for different missions:

A380 : high volume on very long routes - disadvantage only side loading
B748F : less volume, same payload on shorter routes - advantage is the nose door

By the way, has somebody the figures for the maximum range for both airplanes with max payload?

 Smile
 
MD-90
Posts: 7835
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2000 12:45 pm

RE: Airbus, Boeing Clash Over Jumbo Freighters

Sat Jul 22, 2006 3:51 pm

Woot. Nothing like two big companies getting all emotional about their respective products.
 
Johnny
Posts: 812
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 1:38 am

RE: Airbus, Boeing Clash Over Jumbo Freighters

Sat Jul 22, 2006 7:51 pm

Nobody here who can tell the range for both airplanes with same payload ?!?

I cannot believe it...

Johnny  Smile
 
PanHAM
Posts: 8528
Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 6:44 pm

RE: Airbus, Boeing Clash Over Jumbo Freighters

Sat Jul 22, 2006 8:32 pm

Looks like the figures are not publsihed yet. The A380F flies farther with a full payload than the B747-8F, it should go even further with a reduced payloasd matching that of the Boeing aircraft.

But that is purely academic, in most cases it does not make sense to trading 15 or so tons revenue cargo for a greater range oif youi can sell the space fully.
The A380F's full range at max payload is not required by most operators anyway.
Not by FX or UPS who might be able to operate N/S USA-China and vv, but need the ANC hub to exchange pallets.

Range is not that important for a freighter, commonality in infrastructure is, and that is not given with the A380F.
powered by Eierlikör
 
redcordes
Posts: 244
Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2006 6:28 am

RE: Airbus, Boeing Clash Over Jumbo Freighters

Sat Jul 22, 2006 8:45 pm

I would think that weight and not volume is much more often the limiting factor for these aircraft--even Fedex and UPS. Does anyone have those numbers?
"The only source of knowledge is experience." A. Einstein "Science w/o religion is lame. Religion w/o science is blind."
 
brendows
Posts: 801
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 4:55 pm

RE: Airbus, Boeing Clash Over Jumbo Freighters

Sat Jul 22, 2006 8:52 pm

Quoting Johnny (Reply 20):
Nobody here who can tell the range for both airplanes with same payload ?!?

With the numbers published in December 2005, the 748F will fly about 4500nm miles with a full payload of 295.200lb (@ 10lb/cu ft.) The A380F (with Trent 977 engines) will fly about 6250nm with the same payload.
 
sonic67
Posts: 284
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 2:43 pm

RE: Airbus, Boeing Clash Over Jumbo Freighters

Sun Jul 23, 2006 6:01 am

Quoting FlyDreamliner (Reply 9):
Functionally 50% more hold volume, roughly, sure. But it only carries about 7.5% more weight. Moreover, the A380F is structurally 80 tons heavier empty to carry roughly 9 more tons of cargo. A380 is not a good deal for weight, not a bad deal for volume.

So what you are saying is the 380 would be great for caring Styrofoam peanuts? Big grin

I think the 380-8 being able to carry 50% more volume is compared to a 747-400 so compared to the 747-8f must be less of a %. I can't find any hard facts but I remember Airbus saying this before Boeing announced the 747-8. Can any one confirm with hard facts?

Thanks GS
 
JayinKitsap
Posts: 627
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

RE: Airbus, Boeing Clash Over Jumbo Freighters

Sun Jul 23, 2006 6:24 am

Quoting Johnny (Reply 18):
By the way, has somebody the figures for the maximum range for both airplanes with max payload?

The Boeing Airport Compatibility Brocure from their site lists the 747-8F having 290,000 lb payload to 4,475 nm, declining linerly on payload to 175,000 at 7,500 miles, then steep decline to 0 payload at 9,700 miles.

The Airbus Range Payload chart has for the 380F with Trents 150 tons to 5,700 nm, declining to 90 tons at 8,200 nm, rapidly declining to 0 at 10,000 nm.

So a different profile.

Based on what I have seen, the 748F has better economics for a mission less than 4,475 nm with a payload that is limited by weight or within the volume limits. Over 4,475 to 5,700 nm and certainly more as the range increases the A380 could be the better choice for the mission. This would also pertain to the steeper portion of the curve. However, for economics I believe that economical freight operations are all below the 5,700 nm. The majority of the air cargo system wouldn't use over the 4,000 nm range.
 
Johnny
Posts: 812
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 1:38 am

RE: Airbus, Boeing Clash Over Jumbo Freighters

Sun Jul 23, 2006 2:53 pm

Thanks for your answers!

 Smile
 
WingedMigrator
Posts: 1767
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 9:45 am

RE: Airbus, Boeing Clash Over Jumbo Freighters

Sun Jul 23, 2006 3:14 pm

Quoting JayinKitsap (Reply 25):
However, for economics I believe that economical freight operations are all below the 5,700 nm.

I think this is due mostly to the previous unavailability of freighters with a maximum payload range of 5600 nm. Today, flying that range requires trading payload for fuel under the MTOW constraint, which is not usually considered economical.

Quoting JayinKitsap (Reply 25):
The majority of the air cargo system wouldn't use over the 4,000 nm range.

This is true for the next few years, but as longer range freighters (B777F, A380F, A350F) come on line, the air cargo network is likely to evolve in order to take advantage of the new capability.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 817Dreamliiner, Baidu [Spider], benin, Channex757, Flyingsottsman, jonchan627, lightsaber, OzarkD9S, Polot, PUDFW, qf15, rutankrd, Sparrow787, SpoonNZ, springtx, steman, tistpaa727, Yahoo [Bot] and 218 guests