Max Q
Topic Author
Posts: 7412
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 12:40 pm

UPS and the 777F

Mon Mar 04, 2019 7:24 am

UPS still operates quite a few MD11’s, the
triple seems like a good replacement in
that capacity range and it has tremendous performance


Thoughts ?
The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.
 
UPS Pilot
Posts: 870
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 1:17 pm

Re: UPS and the 777F

Mon Mar 04, 2019 9:55 pm

Looking at A330F. Rumors of A350F launch customer. Looking at 777 too.
 
SteelChair
Posts: 877
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2017 11:37 am

Re: UPS and the 777F

Mon Mar 04, 2019 10:01 pm

We know one thing: money won't be a problem!

I still recall the ridiculous 727-100 re-engine effort. No way they ever got their money back out of that deal.
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 6368
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

Re: UPS and the 777F

Mon Mar 04, 2019 10:05 pm

Rather different products...

A330-200F: 70 t, 3200 nm
MD-11F: 92 t, 3600 nm
777F: 102 t, 5000 nm

An A350-900F with a reinforced floor would probably come in close to the MD-11 numbers.

It seems to me that the needed mission will determine which aircraft gets selected. Will the bigger 747 fleet take over the heaviest missions, leaving the A330F (whether new -200Fs or converted -300s) as the efficient choice? Or will growth enable the capacity of bigger, more expensive 777Fs to be used profitably?

This will also be an issue eventually for FedEx, which has said that its MD-11s aren't going anywhere for the moment, but which will eventually face a gap between the 767F/A306F fleets and the 777F fleet.
 
UPS757Pilot
Posts: 87
Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2007 5:22 am

Re: UPS and the 777F

Mon Mar 04, 2019 11:04 pm

One issue involves aircraft parking, especially in SDF. Comparing wingspans, all of the above are much larger. Will be interesting to see what develops.
 
acjbbj
Posts: 229
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2018 7:06 pm

Re: UPS and the 777F

Mon Mar 04, 2019 11:43 pm

Weren't there rumours about UPS pushing Airbus for an A339 freight version?
Douglas Aircraft Company
July 22, 1921 - May 23, 2006
You will be missed.
 
texl1649
Posts: 945
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2007 5:38 am

Re: UPS and the 777F

Mon Mar 04, 2019 11:53 pm

Would RR power by the hour be a good deal for a (comparatively low utilization) freighter based on their rates/minimums etc?
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 17230
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: UPS and the 777F

Tue Mar 05, 2019 12:43 am

UPS would be a great launch customer for an A338F.
You know nothing John Snow.
 
JayinKitsap
Posts: 1277
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

Re: UPS and the 777F

Tue Mar 05, 2019 1:48 am

lightsaber wrote:
UPS would be a great launch customer for an A338F.


and or a A333 P2F conversion, there will be a good bit of feedstock in the future.
 
User avatar
Spacepope
Posts: 4191
Joined: Tue Dec 28, 1999 11:10 am

Re: UPS and the 777F

Tue Mar 05, 2019 2:26 am

lightsaber wrote:
UPS would be a great launch customer for an A338F.

Wingspan of the MD-11 is pretty good for that or a B789F...
The last of the famous international playboys
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26144
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Re: UPS and the 777F

Tue Mar 05, 2019 2:27 am

seabosdca wrote:
It seems to me that the needed mission will determine which aircraft gets selected. Will the bigger 747 fleet take over the heaviest missions, leaving the A330F (whether new -200Fs or converted -300s) as the efficient choice? Or will growth enable the capacity of bigger, more expensive 777Fs to be used profitably?


One possible outlier is that the 747-8F fleet (as planned or even with additional future buys) could take enough of the heavy lift handled by the MD-11F that the remainder could be taken over by the 767-300F. I understand UPS' A300-600RF fleet is relatively young, but I would expect the 767-300(BC)F will be their eventual replacements as it can lift more, farther. This would allow UPS to have a streamlined 747/767/757 fleet with a common pilot pool for the two smaller members (and a path for the 767/757 crews to move to the 747 as they gain seniority).

I do think the 777F might not be a good fit for UPS. FedEx uses them in part for their range to allow them to offer a later evening pick-up in China while still being able to make their main US hubs by the major sorts. UPS has, to my knowledge, not followed suit. So really the 777F would just be there for its lift and as has been noted, the A330-300P2F could fill the bill and would also allow a direct path for the A300 pilots to move over as those frames are retired.
 
User avatar
GEUltraFan9XGTF
Posts: 267
Joined: Thu Nov 22, 2018 3:31 pm

Re: UPS and the 777F

Tue Mar 05, 2019 2:39 am

Does Airbus have either a 359F or 338F in the works? All news (fantasy) to me.
© 2019. All statements are my own. The use of my statements, including by journalists, YouTube vloggers like "DJ's Aviation", etc. without my written consent is strictly prohibited.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26144
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Re: UPS and the 777F

Tue Mar 05, 2019 2:57 am

GEUltraFan9XGTF wrote:
Does Airbus have either a 359F or 338F in the works? All news (fantasy) to me.


During the launch presentation, Airbus presented as possibly future concepts an A350-900 freighter and a ULR A350-900, both featuring the operating weights and undercarriage of the A350-1000. I expect that 280,000kg is enough TOW for an A350-900 so they would just need to replace the CFRP cabin floor with an aluminum one when they feel the market is ready.

As for the A330-800, speculation is that Airbus will eventually adopt the platform as a freighter to replace the existing A330-200F.
 
727200
Posts: 633
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2017 5:31 pm

Re: UPS and the 777F

Tue Mar 05, 2019 5:31 am

How many 350Fs would they have to sell just to break even? And realistically, is there a big enough market for them given all the aircraft flying that can be converted?
 
SXDFC
Posts: 1927
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2007 6:07 pm

Re: UPS and the 777F

Tue Mar 05, 2019 7:50 am

When will UPS start to evaluate a possible 757 replacement? Aren’t some of their 75s getting old?
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 6368
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

Re: UPS and the 777F

Tue Mar 05, 2019 8:12 am

SXDFC wrote:
When will UPS start to evaluate a possible 757 replacement? Aren’t some of their 75s getting old?


Their oldest 757s are at right about half of the cycle limit, with very low hours. Keep in mind that these are used for 2-4 mostly shortish flights per day. They'll be able to fly for as long as UPS can find parts to maintain them.
 
Swadian
Posts: 534
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2016 4:56 am

Re: UPS and the 777F

Tue Mar 05, 2019 8:22 am

Wouldn't be surprised if they go for 777F to get transpacific range.
John Wang, Founder and President of Inland Streamliner.
 
VSMUT
Posts: 2551
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2016 11:40 am

Re: UPS and the 777F

Tue Mar 05, 2019 10:37 am

acjbbj wrote:
Weren't there rumours about UPS pushing Airbus for an A339 freight version?


Yep, there is. Even suggestions that UPS and Amazon were pushing for an A330-1000 freighter.
 
User avatar
Veigar
Posts: 390
Joined: Sat Jun 27, 2015 4:09 pm

Re: UPS and the 777F

Tue Mar 05, 2019 11:50 am

SXDFC wrote:
When will UPS start to evaluate a possible 757 replacement? Aren’t some of their 75s getting old?



Definitely not cargo levels of old to get rid of yet. Those puppies will be flying for a loooong time.
 
HPRamper
Posts: 4931
Joined: Sat May 14, 2005 4:22 am

Re: UPS and the 777F

Tue Mar 05, 2019 12:26 pm

seabosdca wrote:
Rather different products...

A330-200F: 70 t, 3200 nm
MD-11F: 92 t, 3600 nm
777F: 102 t, 5000 nm

An A350-900F with a reinforced floor would probably come in close to the MD-11 numbers.

It seems to me that the needed mission will determine which aircraft gets selected. Will the bigger 747 fleet take over the heaviest missions, leaving the A330F (whether new -200Fs or converted -300s) as the efficient choice? Or will growth enable the capacity of bigger, more expensive 777Fs to be used profitably?

This will also be an issue eventually for FedEx, which has said that its MD-11s aren't going anywhere for the moment, but which will eventually face a gap between the 767F/A306F fleets and the 777F fleet.

The problem with the A350 is that the fuselage is a bit too narrow to accomodate the types on containers used on the MD-11F. Even that 16 inches seems small but I believe is a deal breaker. The 777F accomodates the same container footprints and that's why the move to 777F was so natural for FX.

For the integrators (and I know you know this already) it's not as much about MTOW or overall volume but standardized position capacity, and as much as the 777F is touted as being much larger and more capable than the MD-11F, at least how FX uses it, it carries only a very small amount more than the 11. 2 more positions I believe on the upper deck, and the lower deck is identical. Range, fuel burn and dispatch reliability are the much bigger factors at play.
 
User avatar
AECM
Posts: 167
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 2:52 am

Re: UPS and the 777F

Tue Mar 05, 2019 12:34 pm

JayinKitsap wrote:
lightsaber wrote:
UPS would be a great launch customer for an A338F.


and or a A333 P2F conversion, there will be a good bit of feedstock in the future.
DHL was the launch customer of the A333P2F

https://www.planespotters.net/airframe/ ... ong/Lqdtgq

Egyptair was the launch customer of the A332P2F

https://www.planespotters.net/airframe/ ... rgo/4jNh7n

And so far I think these two are the only A330P2F
 
User avatar
cougar15
Posts: 1409
Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 6:10 pm

Re: UPS and the 777F

Tue Mar 05, 2019 1:01 pm

AECM wrote:
JayinKitsap wrote:
lightsaber wrote:
UPS would be a great launch customer for an A338F.


and or a A333 P2F conversion, there will be a good bit of feedstock in the future.
DHL was the launch customer of the A333P2F

https://www.planespotters.net/airframe/ ... ong/Lqdtgq

Egyptair was the launch customer of the A332P2F

https://www.planespotters.net/airframe/ ... rgo/4jNh7n

And so far I think these two are the only A330P2F


That's because everyone on these threads keeps telling us the wingspan is an issue as it would require a ramp reconfig. but they forget that this was done umpteen times in the past for upgrades in the integrator fleets from one type to another, and yes, at the primary hubs too (SDF/MEM)! I think the A330P2F will find it´s place, not just at DHL, but each time I mention that people come up with the same argument! Not seriously looking at these would be foolish economically, and that is something neither FX nor 5X are! Let´s talk again in a few years...…..
some you lose, others you can´t win!
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 9176
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: UPS and the 777F

Tue Mar 05, 2019 1:17 pm

cougar15 wrote:
AECM wrote:
JayinKitsap wrote:

and or a A333 P2F conversion, there will be a good bit of feedstock in the future.
DHL was the launch customer of the A333P2F

https://www.planespotters.net/airframe/ ... ong/Lqdtgq

Egyptair was the launch customer of the A332P2F

https://www.planespotters.net/airframe/ ... rgo/4jNh7n

And so far I think these two are the only A330P2F


That's because everyone on these threads keeps telling us the wingspan is an issue as it would require a ramp reconfig. but they forget that this was done umpteen times in the past for upgrades in the integrator fleets from one type to another, and yes, at the primary hubs too (SDF/MEM)! I think the A330P2F will find it´s place, not just at DHL, but each time I mention that people come up with the same argument! Not seriously looking at these would be foolish economically, and that is something neither FX nor 5X are! Let´s talk again in a few years...…..

Wingspan is more of an issue when you are looking at new build freighters, because if you have to reconfigure everything you want something that will give you the most bang for your buck, which is where the A332F currently struggles (not as good as 777F which has same wingspan issue, value over 763F is questionable and the 767 does not have wingspan issue).

Wingspan becomes less of a problem when you are getting cheap converted aircraft, and the A333P2F (or a A339F, or a A330-1000F) is offering more volume over a 763F for regional ops than a A332F making it more attractive (to a package carrier who primarily maxes out volume first).
 
User avatar
flyPIT
Posts: 1498
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 6:21 am

Re: UPS and the 777F

Tue Mar 05, 2019 2:38 pm

cougar15 wrote:
That's because everyone on these threads keeps telling us the wingspan is an issue as it would require a ramp reconfig. but they forget that this was done umpteen times in the past for upgrades in the integrator fleets from one type to another, and yes, at the primary hubs too (SDF/MEM)

I don't think you looked at SDF carefully. Since the UPS "Worldport" was completed I don't think they ever did a ramp reconfig as you mention. This would be a very comprehensive undertaking with those wings coming off the main sort building. So yes wing span is an issue. Not so much while parked (because spots can be repainted and doors/conveyors from the building relocated) but more so while taxiing in the alley. Aircraft length is an issue while parked on the wings. Anything longer than an MD-11 will infringe on the taxi lane.

Having said that the simple solution is more remote parking but that would not be optimal. But I don't think it would be a make or break thing as far as UPS getting more large a/c.
FLYi
 
dcs921
Posts: 15
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 4:40 pm

Re: UPS and the 777F

Tue Mar 05, 2019 4:24 pm

IMHO the 777F will eventually end up with UPS as a replacement for the MD-11F along with some additional 763F. I think the 777F is better replacement for the MD-11F than any of the A330Fs for a few reasons.

1. Wing span which has been mentioned many times in the past. flyPIT is exactly right about how large of a task it would be to make SDF compatible for the larger aircraft. Anything that's bigger than a MD-11F would likely be parked remotely.

2. I would be shocked if they choose the A338F as it barley gives them more lift than the 763F. As UPS would likely use the A338F it has about the same volume as the 763F. The A338F main deck holds 23 ULDs, 1 less than the 24 ULDs the 763F holds on its main deck. On the lower deck the A338F hold 1 full and 1 half position more than the 763F.

3. The A338F cannot hold double row AMJ ULDs that the MD-11F uses on its main deck. The 777F can hold double row AMJs and it can hold the larger AMX type ULDs.

4.The A333P2F has a better chance. But I think they have a bit buyers remorse with buying conversions. Only three 763BCF were bought, they are used exclusively in the European network, and they bought 9 new 763F after buying the 763BCF.
 
32andBelow
Posts: 3928
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 2:54 am

Re: UPS and the 777F

Tue Mar 05, 2019 5:03 pm

Swadian wrote:
Wouldn't be surprised if they go for 777F to get transpacific range.

It’s Interestinf fedex has gone that route but still stops a whole lot of their 777s in anc for fuel.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26144
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Re: UPS and the 777F

Tue Mar 05, 2019 9:10 pm

Swadian wrote:
Wouldn't be surprised if they go for 777F to get transpacific range.


UPS' Louisville-Dubai 747-8F route is longer than Shenzhen-Ontario so they could conceivably fly it TPAC non-stop of they wanted, though it would be below max payload. The current routing is Louisville-Dubai-
Shenzhen-Anchorage-Louisville which would allow the plane to fly full.


32andBelow wrote:
It’s Interesting fedex has gone that route but still stops a whole lot of their 777s in anc for fuel.


Doing Shanghai--Anchorage-Memphis would allow more payload to be carried than doing Shanghai-Memphis direct (though that is offered). FX does offer a Shenzhen-Memphis-Anchorage-Narita-Incheon-Shenzhen "777 Direct" service.
 
Bricktop
Posts: 1286
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 11:04 am

Re: UPS and the 777F

Tue Mar 05, 2019 9:30 pm

dcs921 wrote:
1. Wing span which has been mentioned many times in the past. flyPIT is exactly right about how large of a task it would be to make SDF compatible for the larger aircraft. Anything that's bigger than a MD-11F would likely be parked remotely.

Is that what they do with the B747-8Fs?
 
OldAeroGuy
Posts: 3835
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 6:50 am

Re: UPS and the 777F

Tue Mar 05, 2019 9:44 pm

HPRamper wrote:
The problem with the A350 is that the fuselage is a bit too narrow to accomodate the types of containers used on the MD-11F. Even that 16 inches seems small but I believe is a deal breaker. The 777F accomodates the same container footprints and that's why the move to 777F was so natural for FX.


Main deck cargo capability was one of the design decisions that selected the 777 cross section.

It's one other reason that the term "XWB" is a bit of a joke.
Airplane design is easy, the difficulty is getting them to fly - Barnes Wallis
 
Moosefire
Posts: 88
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2018 12:47 pm

Re: UPS and the 777F

Tue Mar 05, 2019 9:50 pm

32andBelow wrote:
Swadian wrote:
Wouldn't be surprised if they go for 777F to get transpacific range.

It’s Interestinf fedex has gone that route but still stops a whole lot of their 777s in anc for fuel.


ANC is more than just a tech stop, it is also a sort facility. It allows for faster routings down the west coast.
MD-11F/C-17A Pilot
 
dcs921
Posts: 15
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 4:40 pm

Re: UPS and the 777F

Tue Mar 05, 2019 11:22 pm

Bricktop wrote:
Is that what they do with the B747-8Fs?

Yes, all 747s are parked remotely. If you look at a Google maps overview of SDF, you will see all of them are parked on the south end.
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 833
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

Re: UPS and the 777F

Tue Mar 05, 2019 11:28 pm

OldAeroGuy wrote:
Main deck cargo capability was one of the design decisions that selected the 777 cross section.

It's one other reason that the term "XWB" is a bit of a joke.

No. The term "XWB" was to differentiate the new A350 offering (with the wider fuselage) from the original A350 offering (with the same cross-section as the A300/310/330/340.
 
Bricktop
Posts: 1286
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 11:04 am

Re: UPS and the 777F

Tue Mar 05, 2019 11:34 pm

dcs921 wrote:
Bricktop wrote:
Is that what they do with the B747-8Fs?

Yes, all 747s are parked remotely. If you look at a Google maps overview of SDF, you will see all of them are parked on the south end.

Wow, impressive operation. UPS and a handful of RJ's.
 
32andBelow
Posts: 3928
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 2:54 am

Re: UPS and the 777F

Wed Mar 06, 2019 1:26 am

Moosefire wrote:
32andBelow wrote:
Swadian wrote:
Wouldn't be surprised if they go for 777F to get transpacific range.

It’s Interestinf fedex has gone that route but still stops a whole lot of their 777s in anc for fuel.


ANC is more than just a tech stop, it is also a sort facility. It allows for faster routings down the west coast.

Just pointing out people talk about the 777 range yet the UPS 747s and the FX 777s still stop here. I've also seen many Korean 777 freighters here.
 
OldAeroGuy
Posts: 3835
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 6:50 am

Re: UPS and the 777F

Wed Mar 06, 2019 1:46 am

WayexTDI wrote:
OldAeroGuy wrote:
Main deck cargo capability was one of the design decisions that selected the 777 cross section.

It's one other reason that the term "XWB" is a bit of a joke.

No. The term "XWB" was to differentiate the new A350 offering (with the wider fuselage) from the original A350 offering (with the same cross-section as the A300/310/330/340.


Still, since the A350 cabin width is the 6th widest Western twin aisle behind the A380, 747, 777, MD-10/11 and L1011, what makes it an "Extra Wide Body"? (8th if you count the 777X and the IL-86/86.)
Last edited by OldAeroGuy on Wed Mar 06, 2019 2:09 am, edited 1 time in total.
Airplane design is easy, the difficulty is getting them to fly - Barnes Wallis
 
User avatar
N328KF
Posts: 5943
Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 3:50 am

Re: UPS and the 777F

Wed Mar 06, 2019 1:52 am

WayexTDI wrote:
OldAeroGuy wrote:
Main deck cargo capability was one of the design decisions that selected the 777 cross section.

It's one other reason that the term "XWB" is a bit of a joke.

No. The term "XWB" was to differentiate the new A350 offering (with the wider fuselage) from the original A350 offering (with the same cross-section as the A300/310/330/340.


“XWB” sounded better than “Mark IV,” or “we’ll get it right eventually!” :)
“In the age of information, ignorance is a choice.”
-Donny Miller
 
OldAeroGuy
Posts: 3835
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 6:50 am

Re: UPS and the 777F

Wed Mar 06, 2019 4:24 am

N328KF wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
OldAeroGuy wrote:
Main deck cargo capability was one of the design decisions that selected the 777 cross section.

It's one other reason that the term "XWB" is a bit of a joke.

No. The term "XWB" was to differentiate the new A350 offering (with the wider fuselage) from the original A350 offering (with the same cross-section as the A300/310/330/340.


“XWB” sounded better than “Mark IV,” or “we’ll get it right eventually!” :)


I like it! :P
Airplane design is easy, the difficulty is getting them to fly - Barnes Wallis
 
User avatar
flyingclrs727
Posts: 2295
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2007 7:44 am

Re: UPS and the 777F

Wed Mar 06, 2019 4:55 am

SteelChair wrote:
We know one thing: money won't be a problem!

I still recall the ridiculous 727-100 re-engine effort. No way they ever got their money back out of that deal.


Why? They bought the 727-100's cheap. Once the 727's were retired, the engines were sold off to operators of businesses jets. In between UPS was able to operate with Stage III compliant aircraft into airports at night and early morning. They were also able to increase the MTOW of their aircraft.
 
Okcflyer
Posts: 545
Joined: Sat May 23, 2015 11:10 pm

Re: UPS and the 777F

Wed Mar 06, 2019 5:12 am

I’ve always wondered if the composite floor beams in the 77E / 77W are strong enough for integrators like FedEx and UPS with their rather low density freight. Also wondered if there are major wiring relocation requirements for main deck door modification (IIRC, 787 wiring was designed with this in mind). Seems the 77W P2F would make a good large domestic-market hauler with compatibility with 77L’s (for FX) for long distance routes with heavier/denser freight from Asian locations. I assume there are beam or wiring issues which is why no such beast exists.

It’s been publically stated pax 777 composite floor beams are not strong enough for standard freight duty (77F uses stronger, reinforced aluminum beams).
 
INFINITI329
Posts: 2426
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2012 12:53 am

Re: UPS and the 777F

Wed Mar 06, 2019 9:29 am

UPS ordering the A330F would be huge for Airbus.
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 833
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

Re: UPS and the 777F

Wed Mar 06, 2019 4:25 pm

OldAeroGuy wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
OldAeroGuy wrote:
Main deck cargo capability was one of the design decisions that selected the 777 cross section.

It's one other reason that the term "XWB" is a bit of a joke.

No. The term "XWB" was to differentiate the new A350 offering (with the wider fuselage) from the original A350 offering (with the same cross-section as the A300/310/330/340.


Still, since the A350 cabin width is the 6th widest Western twin aisle behind the A380, 747, 777, MD-10/11 and L1011, what makes it an "Extra Wide Body"? (8th if you count the 777X and the IL-86/86.)

Sure. Let's call it then the A350-wider-but-not-so-wide-but-still-wider...
Happy?
 
UPS Pilot
Posts: 870
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 1:17 pm

Re: UPS and the 777F

Wed Mar 06, 2019 8:01 pm

Mentioned above, wingspan is a huge issue. When UPS was looking at the 767, the MD-11 new build was also looked at. It was decided then to go with the 767. The 76 has been a workhorse at UPS. Who knows, maybe more 767's and 748's... I do know the MD schedules have changed around a bit. Back to EPWA and possibly a YSSY turn.
 
rlwynn
Posts: 1362
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2000 3:35 am

Re: UPS and the 777F

Wed Mar 06, 2019 8:31 pm

Cargo does not care about fuel stops. It is only about getting the tonnage across the ocean.
I can drive faster than you
 
OldAeroGuy
Posts: 3835
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 6:50 am

Re: UPS and the 777F

Thu Mar 07, 2019 2:31 pm

WayexTDI wrote:
OldAeroGuy wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
No. The term "XWB" was to differentiate the new A350 offering (with the wider fuselage) from the original A350 offering (with the same cross-section as the A300/310/330/340.


Still, since the A350 cabin width is the 6th widest Western twin aisle behind the A380, 747, 777, MD-10/11 and L1011, what makes it an "Extra Wide Body"? (8th if you count the 777X and the IL-86/86.)

Sure. Let's call it then the A350-wider-but-not-so-wide-but-still-wider...
Happy?


Just calling it the A350 should have been sufficient.
Airplane design is easy, the difficulty is getting them to fly - Barnes Wallis
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 833
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

Re: UPS and the 777F

Thu Mar 07, 2019 5:42 pm

OldAeroGuy wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
OldAeroGuy wrote:

Still, since the A350 cabin width is the 6th widest Western twin aisle behind the A380, 747, 777, MD-10/11 and L1011, what makes it an "Extra Wide Body"? (8th if you count the 777X and the IL-86/86.)

Sure. Let's call it then the A350-wider-but-not-so-wide-but-still-wider...
Happy?


Just calling it the A350 should have been sufficient.

Absolutely; Airbus made the mistake to name the first proposal with a "real" designation, and not a code name (like they did for the A3XX or like Boeing does).
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 9176
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: UPS and the 777F

Thu Mar 07, 2019 5:49 pm

WayexTDI wrote:
OldAeroGuy wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
Sure. Let's call it then the A350-wider-but-not-so-wide-but-still-wider...
Happy?


Just calling it the A350 should have been sufficient.

Absolutely; Airbus made the mistake to name the first proposal with a "real" designation, and not a code name (like they did for the A3XX or like Boeing does).

Well the first A350 wasn’t a “proposal” or study it was a real aircraft launched with full approval from the board that Airbus was doing engineering on, taking orders for, and fully intended to build.

But all of this is completely off topic and has nothing to do with UPS or freighters.
 
User avatar
AECM
Posts: 167
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 2:52 am

Re: UPS and the 777F

Thu Mar 07, 2019 5:56 pm

If UPS would be a A350F launch customer could we be seeing an A359 Fuselage with wing and landing gear of the A35K and a MTOW arround 320ton?
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 6368
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

Re: UPS and the 777F

Thu Mar 07, 2019 5:59 pm

AECM wrote:
If UPS would be a A350F launch customer could we be seeing an A359 Fuselage with wing and landing gear of the A35K and a MTOW arround 320ton?


I don't think such a drastic change would be necessary. It would create a ULH freight monster with a range longer than the 777F. A reinforced floor and the existing 280 t MTOW ought to do fine at more typical ranges; I'd guess a payload of about 90 t over around 4000 nm. If my guess is right then it would be a nearly exact MD-11 replacement, with the major exception of fuselage width discussed above.
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 9176
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: UPS and the 777F

Thu Mar 07, 2019 6:03 pm

The only stumbling block I see to a A350F is timing. Seems a bit early to be talking about one when the passenger aircraft are still in high demand with a relatively long backlog. I see a A330neoF as more likely.
 
Moosefire
Posts: 88
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2018 12:47 pm

Re: UPS and the 777F

Thu Mar 07, 2019 6:21 pm

rlwynn wrote:
Cargo does not care about fuel stops. It is only about getting the tonnage across the ocean.


Expediency still matters, especially for express carriers. Removing fuel stops translates to later pickup times.
MD-11F/C-17A Pilot

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos