fly707
Posts: 340
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2001 9:43 am

Low Cost Cargo Planes?

Sun Jan 16, 2005 7:26 pm

I need to know which cargo plane has the best operating costs ?

I think the Boeing 767-300 is the best it can fly long range flights with a load up to 50 tons and perfect gas consumption .


I need to know your opinion please .

Regards .
Without mistakes we will never learn
 
2H4
Posts: 7960
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 11:11 pm

RE: Low Cost Cargo Planes?

Mon Jan 17, 2005 1:39 am

I'd say there's only one type of aircraft with perfect fuel consumption.....





View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Stephen Liard





 Big grin


2H4
Intentionally Left Blank
 
pilotpip
Posts: 2820
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2003 3:26 pm

RE: Low Cost Cargo Planes?

Mon Jan 17, 2005 3:39 am

I don't think there is any one perfect aircraft for this. Much like Pax airliners, one doesn't fit all.

I would argue that the perfect cargo aircraft might be one of the older aircraft like the MD-11 or A-300. It's going to take a long time to make up the difference in purchase price through fuel consumption.
DMI
 
2H4
Posts: 7960
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 11:11 pm

RE: Low Cost Cargo Planes?

Mon Jan 17, 2005 4:00 am

I agree with Pilotpip. In order to define an ideal aircraft, you have to first specify the requirements and conditions.

On a much smaller scale, it's like asking which car has the best operating costs. If you only consider the direct operating costs, you'd probably end up with a Honda Insight or Civic. On the aviation side of things, you'd end up with perhaps a Cessna 150. Neither of these are particularly suited to large or heavy loads.

A better (but still overly simplistic) question would be, for example, which aircraft with a XXXXX-pound cargo capacity has the lowest operating costs for a XXXX-mile route?


2H4
Intentionally Left Blank
 
SlamClick
Posts: 9576
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2003 7:09 am

RE: Low Cost Cargo Planes?

Mon Jan 17, 2005 5:44 am

Wow! One does not often see "low cost" and "plane" in the same sentence.  Smile

Cost is really a slippery concept. Still it has to be true that the DC-8-70 series have to have been one of the most successful airframes ever in the freight business. They have just gone out night after night carrying tons, year in, year out. They've made millionaires out of the damnedest bunch of operators.

Low-cost airframes are low-value airframes. You probably have to get into and out of them at the right time. For example, at one time in the 1980s you could buy a 727-100 for about a mill and a half. The engines were worth about $500K each at the time, so, basically if you bought three high-time engines they'd give you an old 727 to fly them home on. One might have gotten into the 727-100 air freight business back then by cutting in some cargo doors but operate them a few years and the inefficiency that had the price low in the first place is going to eat your lunch for you.

Low cost is okay. High yield is better.
Happiness is not seeing another trite Ste. Maarten photo all week long.
 
fly707
Posts: 340
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2001 9:43 am

RE: Low Cost Cargo Planes?

Tue Jan 18, 2005 4:55 am

I also agree with Pilotpip, but don't forget that the Airbus 300B4 has a large operating costs it has a consuption of 6 tons of gas per hour + expensive maintenance cost .

As an example a 2000 nm route with aprox 5 hours flying with a payload of 45 tons ?

**I don't mean to make any comparison .

AIRBUS 300 B4 will burn about 32 tons of gas during the flight one ton costs about 450 usd that will have a sum of 14400usd , dry lease for an airbus 300 B4 is from a range of 170,000 usd 250,000 usd per month .

Boeing 767-300 will burn about 22 tons of gas during the same flight with a sum of 9900 usd , the dry lease for a Boeing 767-300 is about 220,000 usd up to 360,000 usd per month .

If the a/c will fly 200 hours per month :

Airbus 300 ( b4 ) will consump : 1200 tons gas = 540,000 usd .
Boeing 767-300 will consump : 840 tons gas = 378,000 usd .

Any one disagree ?
I will be pleased to know more opinions .

Regrads .
Without mistakes we will never learn
 
Alessandro
Posts: 4962
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2001 3:13 am

RE: Low Cost Cargo Planes?

Thu Jan 27, 2005 11:51 pm

Depends where you operate, stage 3 or not?
From New Yorqatar to Califarbia...
 
pilotpip
Posts: 2820
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2003 3:26 pm

RE: Low Cost Cargo Planes?

Fri Jan 28, 2005 10:40 am

You also have to take into consideration what the airline's specific needs are. Perhaps they need more volume rather than payload and the larger capacity of an A300 fits their needs better. FX can justify a DC-10s a day to both MEM and IND. Both about 60 minute flights but they haul that many letters out of here. Often if they sub an A300 we'll see a 727 to augment it on a through flight from a smaller city. With many of these aircraft, range isn't as much of an issue as payload is.

Also consider that the utilization of these aircraft is much lower than they were back in the day that they hauled pax around. THey are parked all day allowing problems to be fixed. They also aren't subjected to as much wear and tear as a result so the problems shouldn't be as frequent. With the huge number of second generation jets on the market right now it is much less expensive to aquire one of these and pay the three man crew than it is to wait for new jets.
DMI
 
L-188
Posts: 29881
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 1999 11:27 am

RE: Low Cost Cargo Planes?

Fri Jan 28, 2005 12:20 pm

Really have asked too simple of a question, since there are many factors that go into an aircraft.

What is the mission profile?
What type of cargo are you hauling...if you can't get it though the door that airplane isn't for you.

Some factors increase costs up front, new airplane prices. Some lower them such as newer airplanes tend to burn less gas and don't need fixing as often.

Older aircraft can be picked up cheap, ofter have a large pool labor, flight and ground that are familiar with them and can reduce training costs.

It all depends.
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
 
patroni
Posts: 1372
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 1999 7:49 am

RE: Low Cost Cargo Planes?

Sat Jan 29, 2005 6:48 am

THey are parked all day allowing problems to be fixed. They also aren't subjected to as much wear and tear as a result so the problems shouldn't be as frequent.

This depends very much on the type of operation. While integrators mainly use their fleets overnight, a general cargo carrier with its much lower yields can not afford to have an aircraft sitting around for most of the day. You rather have to "sweat the assets". Our 747-400F fly 15.5h a day, out of a 747-200F you can still get maybe 11-12h depending on the airframe hours/cycles.

As L-188 said, purchase/lease and fuel cost are by far not the only factors to consider. There are many additional operational and financial issues to consider, e.g. the market (shipment size, weight and volume, routes), maintenance and crew cost/infrastructure, overflying and landing charges, residual values, etc.

 
IL76TD
Posts: 280
Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2004 1:02 am

RE: Low Cost Cargo Planes?

Tue Feb 01, 2005 3:20 am

easy answer... Ilyushin 76TD

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: BartSimpson, Bing [Bot], n729pa and 10 guests