ha787
Posts: 35
Joined: Wed Jul 12, 2006 12:25 pm

787 Frighter? Possible Or Not?

Wed Jul 26, 2006 4:16 am

will boeing ever come out freighter version of 787? would any cargo airlines take advangeade 787 advanages? what cargo carraier be the first operater of the aircraft

[Edited 2006-07-25 21:21:22]
 
A342
Posts: 4017
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 11:05 pm

RE: 787 Frighter

Wed Jul 26, 2006 4:18 am

You should change the title of the tread...

Anyway, who knows if you can convert the 787, with its composite fuselage. That remains to be seen.

IMO they'll offer new-build Fs someday.
Exceptions confirm the rule.
 
DAYflyer
Posts: 3546
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 9:35 pm

RE: 787 Frighter

Wed Jul 26, 2006 4:18 am

Boeing has not made many comments about the future of the 787 as a freighter that I have read. Most of them were along the lines of "we'll see what happens" types of remarks.
One Nation Under God
 
FCKC
Posts: 1630
Joined: Sun Nov 21, 2004 9:39 pm

RE: 787 Frighter

Wed Jul 26, 2006 4:23 am

Probably they will go ahead with a 787F , as Airbus will go ahead with a A350XWBF.
Even if the 787 is smaller than the 777 , it can be a strong competitor to the last one , and also Boeing will have to be carefull before launching the 787F.
 
zvezda
Posts: 8891
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 8:48 pm

RE: 787 Frighter

Wed Jul 26, 2006 4:23 am

A B787F would require higher thrust engines and the addition of a two-wheel centre bogey. I think we'll see these first in a B787-9ER and B787-10ER. Possibly a B787-11X. Once the suitable engines and landing gear are available, there would be little to keep Boeing from producing new build B787Fs if there is demand.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23203
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: 787 Frighter? Possible Or Not?

Wed Jul 26, 2006 4:27 am

I imagine Boeing will build a 787F if for no other reason then the A330F should pretty much finish off the 767F line, so Boeing will need something smaller then the 777F.
 
User avatar
N328KF
Posts: 5810
Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 3:50 am

RE: 787 Frighter? Possible Or Not?

Wed Jul 26, 2006 4:48 am

One thing about the 787 (and other composite airliners) that may change the dynamic of the industry is that composites don't wear out in the same manner that metals do. If the airframe lasts longer, it might be usable for passenger service for a longer time with some refurbishment. Worn out airframes are usually where freight haulers get their mounts.
When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' -Theodore Roosevelt
 
NYC777
Posts: 5076
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2004 3:00 am

RE: 787 Frighter? Possible Or Not?

Wed Jul 26, 2006 4:53 am

787F freither would complement the entire gamut of freither options from the 737 QC/converstions - 757F - 787F- 777F - 748F. The A350F and A332F will finish off the 767F but wouldn't those two Airbus products be competing against each other?
That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
 
User avatar
CARST
Posts: 901
Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2006 11:00 pm

RE: 787 Frighter? Possible Or Not?

Wed Jul 26, 2006 5:00 am

The A350 will be assembled on the same line where they build the A330 now.


But B should build a 787F to have a complement of the A350F, like the 767F to the A330F.
 
NYC777
Posts: 5076
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2004 3:00 am

RE: 787 Frighter? Possible Or Not?

Wed Jul 26, 2006 5:02 am

Quoting CARST (Reply 8):
The A350 will be assembled on the same line where they build the A330 now.

How is that possible when the A350 will have a wider fuselage than the A330 which requires new tooling?

[Edited 2006-07-25 22:14:15]
That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
 
User avatar
CARST
Posts: 901
Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2006 11:00 pm

RE: 787 Frighter? Possible Or Not?

Wed Jul 26, 2006 5:05 am

A330 and A340 are assemlbed on the same line nowadays.

And the A350 will be assembled on the same line in some years. That is a fact i think.

A340 isn't that "small", perhaps no changes are needed or just small ones.
 
A342
Posts: 4017
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 11:05 pm

RE: 787 Frighter? Possible Or Not?

Wed Jul 26, 2006 5:08 am

Quoting CARST (Reply 10):
And the A350 will be assembled on the same line in some years. That is a fact i think.

Not really. The A332F will keep the line running when the A350 has already had its EIS.
Exceptions confirm the rule.
 
Mir
Posts: 19107
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: 787 Frighter? Possible Or Not?

Wed Jul 26, 2006 5:14 am

So Boeing is making a "frighter" to compete with "scarebus" now? Interesting....  biggrin 

In all seriousness, I think we´ll see a freighter version of the 787 somewhere down the line (has any plane not had a freighter version? - I can´t think of any). But it sometimes takes a while for them to develop.

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
NYC777
Posts: 5076
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2004 3:00 am

RE: 787 Frighter? Possible Or Not?

Wed Jul 26, 2006 5:16 am

Quoting CARST (Reply 10):
A330 and A340 are assemlbed on the same line nowadays.

And the A350 will be assembled on the same line in some years. That is a fact i think

The A350 is supposed to be an all new airplane with nothing in common with the A330/A340. It would only make sense if Airbus intends to stop production of the A330/A340 and convert that line over for A350 production which needs all new tooling.
That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 13467
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

RE: 787 Frighter? Possible Or Not?

Wed Jul 26, 2006 5:17 am

Quoting CARST (Reply 10):
And the A350 will be assembled on the same line in some years. That is a fact i think.

It certainly would have been when the A350 shared the A330/340 fuselage cross-section. With the closure of the A300 line now announced, I suspect Airbus will demolish the old A300 production building and build a new A350 line there.

They will be hoping that the A332F will be keeping the A330/340 line open past the start of A350 production.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
 
astuteman
Posts: 6346
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

RE: 787 Frighter? Possible Or Not?

Wed Jul 26, 2006 6:15 am

Quoting NYC777 (Reply 7):
The A350F and A332F will finish off the 767F but wouldn't those two Airbus products be competing against each other?

I wouldn't imagine so.
IIRC the A350F is a 90t hauler with 5000nm range, the A332F is a 64t hauler. Range - I don't know, but based on similar sized aircraft, I would guess c 4000Nm.

Regards
 
AADC10
Posts: 1507
Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2004 7:40 am

RE: 787 Frighter? Possible Or Not?

Wed Jul 26, 2006 7:03 am

It will probably be a few years before there will be 787 freighters. The main issue is that freighters do not spend as much time in the air as passenger planes, so the cost of the plane itself is more significant and the cost of the fuel is less significant. That is why many freight companies utilize older used jetliners.

Most of the freighters purchased from the factory as freighters tend to be the largest planes, the 744F and A380F, as it creates new markets since they can carry larger and heavier cargo. The 744 is also cheaper than the 787 or 777. The 787 does have the advantage of being able to carry LD3s side by side, over the 767s it is replacing but there are plenty of DC-10s and MD-11s available cheap that can carry LD3s.
 
A342
Posts: 4017
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 11:05 pm

RE: 787 Frighter? Possible Or Not?

Thu Jul 27, 2006 5:34 am

Quoting AADC10 (Reply 16):
but there are plenty of DC-10s and MD-11s available cheap that can carry LD3s.

The MD-11(F)s aren't so cheap because they are in high demand.
Exceptions confirm the rule.
 
787engineer
Posts: 545
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 5:08 am

RE: 787 Frighter? Possible Or Not?

Thu Jul 27, 2006 5:53 am

Quoting CARST (Reply 10):
A330 and A340 are assemlbed on the same line nowadays.

And the A350 will be assembled on the same line in some years. That is a fact i think.

A340 isn't that "small", perhaps no changes are needed or just small ones.

No, especially not with the A350XWB. When the A350 shared the same fuselage cross section with the A330/A340 that was always a possibility depending on demand, but with a new fuselage, they will definitely need a new line. So much of the tooling is dependent on the fuselage cross-section which is why both A and B try their best to maximize re-use cross-sections. For example the A300/A310/A330/A340 and the 707/727/737/757. Like Scbriml chances are the A350XWB will be built where the current A300 line is once it is shut down. Boeing will most likely build a 787F to replace the 767s and other similar sized freighters. The only question is whether it will be a 788 or 789 and when will it EIS compared to the A350XWB.
 
jonathan-l
Posts: 394
Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2002 4:20 am

RE: 787 Frighter? Possible Or Not?

Thu Jul 27, 2006 6:00 am

Quoting AADC10 (Reply 16):
there are plenty of DC-10s and MD-11s available cheap that can carry LD3s.

For long haul, reliability is a key issue and is a main driver in purchasing a new aircraft versus converting an older aircraft.
The operating costs of a DC-10 (and MD-11, albeit to a lesser extent) are not very good compared to current aircraft, and maintenance and fuel can amount to quite alot of money when utilization is high ($5 to 10 million per year more than a modern aircraft). In the end, when you factor in reliability, purchasing a new aircraft can be the most economical solution.
 
NYC777
Posts: 5076
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2004 3:00 am

RE: 787 Frighter? Possible Or Not?

Thu Jul 27, 2006 6:03 am

My question is would the 787 make a good freighter in the first place? What about utilizing it as a military tanker/freighter?
That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
 
HanginOut
Posts: 521
Joined: Sun May 29, 2005 3:24 am

RE: 787 Frighter? Possible Or Not?

Thu Jul 27, 2006 6:24 am

Quoting NYC777 (Reply 20):
What about utilizing it as a military tanker/freighter?

I get the feeling that this is the plane the USAF would like as a new tanker. It is the right size (777 is too big and the 767 can't carry two LD3 containers side by side). If Boeing would build it, I'm positive that there's no way the KC-30 would have a chance in the competition (even though it is a great plane). However, I think that Boeing is counting too much on the buy American factor and that we may see a surprise here and that the KC-30 may be picked over the KC-767.
Dreaming of the day I can work for an airline
 
PolymerPlane
Posts: 832
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 1:12 am

RE: 787 Frighter? Possible Or Not?

Thu Jul 27, 2006 7:38 am

Quoting HanginOut (Reply 21):
It is the right size (777 is too big and the 767 can't carry two LD3 containers side by side).

What does military tanker have anything to do with LD3 containers? The current KC-135 is a narrowbody aircraft, even narrower than Boeing 707.

Cheers,
PP
One day there will be 100% polymer plane
 
pavlin
Posts: 391
Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2005 5:34 am

RE: 787 Frighter? Possible Or Not?

Thu Jul 27, 2006 7:41 am

Quoting A342 (Reply 1):

Anyway, who knows if you can convert the 787, with its composite fuselage.



I know. You can
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23203
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: 787 Frighter? Possible Or Not?

Thu Jul 27, 2006 8:06 am

Quoting HanginOut (Reply 21):
I get the feeling that this is the plane the USAF would like as a new tanker.

Actually, the USAF has expressed concerns that cutting holes into the airframe to allow the installation of blisters (for sensor packs and such) might cause issues (such as moisture might seep in between the blister and the fuselage along the edges or the attachment points).
 
trex8
Posts: 4618
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2002 9:04 am

RE: 787 Frighter? Possible Or Not?

Thu Jul 27, 2006 8:34 am

special sigint/elint etc versions may be a problem due to these numerous cut outs on these types of aircraft but a purpose built tanker with a large main deck door and ventral opening for the boom should be far less of a problem structurally and also a larger production run would make such a customized fuselage more economical
 
474218
Posts: 4510
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 12:27 pm

RE: 787 Frighter? Possible Or Not?

Thu Jul 27, 2006 9:35 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 24):
Actually, the USAF has expressed concerns that cutting holes into the airframe to allow the installation of blisters (for sensor packs and such) might cause issues (such as moisture might seep in between the blister and the fuselage along the edges or the attachment points).

If you can't cut holes in the 787 airframe how is Boeing going to install doors, windows, antennas, lights and all the other items that requires cuts through the airframe? Why can't the area where the cargo door is cut be resealed, so moisture will not seep in between the edges?
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23203
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: 787 Frighter? Possible Or Not?

Thu Jul 27, 2006 9:39 am

Quoting 474218 (Reply 26):
If you can't cut holes in the 787 airframe how is Boeing going to install doors, windows, antennas, lights and all the other items that requires cuts through the airframe? Why can't the area where the cargo door is cut be resealed, so moisture will not seep in between the edges?

All those doors and windows mount flush to the airframe, so they can be more easily sealed, I imagine. The blister packs need to be riveted into the fuselage (so you have to cut a lot of little holes in them) and then be able to be unriveted as necessary for maintenance and replacement. So there are a lot more areas for moisture and contaminants to get at the CFRP, I imagine.

Now, Boeing can probably address this (I mean the B-2, F/A-22, and F-35 all have plenty of access panels, themselves), so this will probably not be a "deal-breaker".
 
474218
Posts: 4510
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 12:27 pm

RE: 787 Frighter? Possible Or Not?

Thu Jul 27, 2006 9:41 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 24):
Actually, the USAF has expressed concerns that cutting holes into the airframe to allow the installation of blisters (for sensor packs and such) might cause issues (such as moisture might seep in between the blister and the fuselage along the edges or the attachment points).

If you can't cut holes in the 787 airframe how is Boeing going to install doors, windows, antennas, lights and all the other items that requires cuts through the airframe? Whenever a cut is made in the airframe the area around the cut must be reinforced, so why can't the area where the cargo door is cut be resealed, so moisture will not seep in between the edges, at the same time the reinforcements are installed?