Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

  • 1
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
 
ZaphodHarkonnen
Posts: 1082
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2015 10:20 am

Re: Cessna SkyCourier Development and Testing Thread

Mon Feb 01, 2021 7:49 pm

HPRamper wrote:
JayinKitsap wrote:
HPRamper wrote:
No. This will be for expansion and right-sizing. I believe the first bunch are headed to the Europe operation.


Around the time of the first assembly and the fire at the plant, there was a news piece on this. Fedex needs to replace some of their 208B's but also up gauge and expand.

Near the same time as the 408 order, Fedex also ordered (30) 72-600F, they are capable of (6) LD3's. so a lot in these two orders.

......

I find it of note that Fedex probably looked at every possibility of in service planes, but actually went with a clean sheet Cessna, which they already have 238 Cargomasters from. They also were the launch customer for the ATR 72-600F, not a small move to do. It looks like if these work as well as Fedex hopes, there could be 100+ for each of these.

The SkyCourier is like a double to triple of the Grand Caravan (Cargomaster?) How the engines compare:
1 × Pratt & Whitney Canada PT6A-114A turboprop, 675 shp (503 kW)
2 × Pratt & Whitney Canada PT6A-65SC turboprop, 1,100 hp (820 kW) each


Also to note - I've heard internally that even though these aircraft have the capability to carry containerized freight, they won't necessarily be doing that on all missions. Currently FX has ground crews bulk load both Cessna and ATR and at some or many locations will still be doing the same.


Which makes sense if they need any sort of special equipment to assist with container loading. But even hand loading I imagine the ground crews will prefer these models as there'll be lots of room to move around and hopefully minimise any bending over.
 
User avatar
eeightning
Posts: 29
Joined: Sun Mar 10, 2019 10:23 am

Re: Cessna SkyCourier Development and Testing Thread

Mon Feb 01, 2021 9:32 pm

It strikes me as a plane for an organization that doesn't pay for it's own fuel and doesn't need much speed or range.
It is as simple as a 20,000lb twin turbine airplane can be.
Low-tech strutted wing, fixed gear, unpressurized, with very big engines (to deal with ice and fit with jets in terminal area) for what it does (compare to the BT-67, or Shorts 360 capability on the same power). I wonder if the bow will be on the high side for such a simple plane?
It will probably be the easiest to maintain, easiest to fly, cheapest to insure, cheapest to build plane of this size ever built. Funny thing - the DC-3 once fit that category. Now the BT-67 is the competition that will lose to the 408. Not because it isn't a more efficient airplane, but because it is too hard to build/fly/maintain.

This 50-200 nm segment is where electric aircraft have the potential to become commercially viable. If fuel stays cheap, and the cost of carbon remains the responsibility of future gens, Cessna will probably make a thousand of these, make parts for 50 years, and make bank all day long. And electric planes will remain the province of weirdos in ultralights, and personal drone transport scam companies.
 
HPRamper
Posts: 5144
Joined: Sat May 14, 2005 4:22 am

Re: Cessna SkyCourier Development and Testing Thread

Tue Feb 02, 2021 10:41 am

ZaphodHarkonnen wrote:
HPRamper wrote:
JayinKitsap wrote:

Around the time of the first assembly and the fire at the plant, there was a news piece on this. Fedex needs to replace some of their 208B's but also up gauge and expand.

Near the same time as the 408 order, Fedex also ordered (30) 72-600F, they are capable of (6) LD3's. so a lot in these two orders.

......

I find it of note that Fedex probably looked at every possibility of in service planes, but actually went with a clean sheet Cessna, which they already have 238 Cargomasters from. They also were the launch customer for the ATR 72-600F, not a small move to do. It looks like if these work as well as Fedex hopes, there could be 100+ for each of these.

The SkyCourier is like a double to triple of the Grand Caravan (Cargomaster?) How the engines compare:
1 × Pratt & Whitney Canada PT6A-114A turboprop, 675 shp (503 kW)
2 × Pratt & Whitney Canada PT6A-65SC turboprop, 1,100 hp (820 kW) each


Also to note - I've heard internally that even though these aircraft have the capability to carry containerized freight, they won't necessarily be doing that on all missions. Currently FX has ground crews bulk load both Cessna and ATR and at some or many locations will still be doing the same.


Which makes sense if they need any sort of special equipment to assist with container loading. But even hand loading I imagine the ground crews will prefer these models as there'll be lots of room to move around and hopefully minimise any bending over.


And that's one of the issues at hand. A special loader will be needed just to work these planes, and at the majority of feeder locations, there's no real ramp crew or ramp facilities, no GSE, just backing a couple of courier vans up to the plane and drivers doing the unloading.
 
jjbiv
Posts: 1270
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2001 10:58 am

Re: Cessna SkyCourier Development and Testing Thread

Mon Feb 08, 2021 5:17 pm

Dumb question maybe but do you know how they do W&B on the feeders (especially at outstations where they may not have accurate freight weights)?

At hubs and ramps do they scan packages in to zones on the aircraft so they can get an accurate weight or is there another method to estimate the weight and its location within the aircraft? I guess you could always build a container for the belly and weight it and then just assume the weight is evenly distributed in the belly after the freight has been bulk loaded. Always wondered how the feeders and bulk loaded bellies and bulk cargo areas handled this. Either way, it is much more complicated than just counting bags I imagine.
 
HPRamper
Posts: 5144
Joined: Sat May 14, 2005 4:22 am

Re: Cessna SkyCourier Development and Testing Thread

Mon Feb 08, 2021 6:04 pm

jjbiv wrote:
Dumb question maybe but do you know how they do W&B on the feeders (especially at outstations where they may not have accurate freight weights)?

At hubs and ramps do they scan packages in to zones on the aircraft so they can get an accurate weight or is there another method to estimate the weight and its location within the aircraft? I guess you could always build a container for the belly and weight it and then just assume the weight is evenly distributed in the belly after the freight has been bulk loaded. Always wondered how the feeders and bulk loaded bellies and bulk cargo areas handled this. Either way, it is much more complicated than just counting bags I imagine.

At a larger ramp, there will be larger scales available and it will be weighed as an entire container and then have the tare subtracted. At small outstations, you're looking at much smaller volumes as well, and they have portable scales on hand to weigh the packages right there at the feeder if need be, or they can do it at the station and therefore know the weight before they ever have to leave for the airport.
The weights printed on package labels are NEVER considered accurate and never accepted as a measure. Everything has to pass over a scale before loading.
And you did touch on this, but for C208 it is almost all considered one zone - Zone 1 - whereas in years past it was divided into 6 zones. Now, all weight is assigned to one zone and it is up to the pilot to take into account possible balance unevenness and fly the plane accordingly. The load is visually checked to make sure it is load leveled but you can never tell if there is one heavy box on one side of the plane, or in the very back, etc.

The ATR is a lot different, it does have separate zones with partitions in between so each zone's freight is weighed separately.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 21708
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Cessna SkyCourier Development and Testing Thread

Mon Feb 08, 2021 7:03 pm

eeightning wrote:
It strikes me as a plane for an organization that doesn't pay for it's own fuel and doesn't need much speed or range.
It is as simple as a 20,000lb twin turbine airplane can be.
Low-tech strutted wing, fixed gear, unpressurized, with very big engines (to deal with ice and fit with jets in terminal area) for what it does (compare to the BT-67, or Shorts 360 capability on the same power). I wonder if the bow will be on the high side for such a simple plane?
It will probably be the easiest to maintain, easiest to fly, cheapest to insure, cheapest to build plane of this size ever built. Funny thing - the DC-3 once fit that category. Now the BT-67 is the competition that will lose to the 408. Not because it isn't a more efficient airplane, but because it is too hard to build/fly/maintain.

This 50-200 nm segment is where electric aircraft have the potential to become commercially viable. If fuel stays cheap, and the cost of carbon remains the responsibility of future gens, Cessna will probably make a thousand of these, make parts for 50 years, and make bank all day long. And electric planes will remain the province of weirdos in ultralights, and personal drone transport scam companies.

In passenger duty, electric Aircraft will grow to, eventually, 400nm. With the weight of batteries, frieghters will be the last market to go electric.

The BT-67 will lose some orders to the 408. But until the 408 proves itself in the cold, it will be a slow transition.

This is the DC-3/BT-67 long term replacement. But I must emphasize long term. The transition over will take decades and will be based on insurance and maintenance costs more than anything else.

Lightsaber
5 months without TV. The best decision of my life.
 
2175301
Posts: 2052
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 11:19 am

Re: Cessna SkyCourier Development and Testing Thread

Mon Feb 08, 2021 8:06 pm

lightsaber wrote:
The BT-67 will lose some orders to the 408. But until the 408 proves itself in the cold, it will be a slow transition.

This is the DC-3/BT-67 long term replacement. But I must emphasize long term. The transition over will take decades and will be based on insurance and maintenance costs more than anything else.

Lightsaber


While their might be some DC-3's and BT-67's that will be replaced by the Cessna 408, I think you are incorrect that this is its replacement even if it should prove to work in arctic conditions.

The DC-3 and BT-67 is twice the size of the Cessna 408. No one is flying DC-3's and BT-67's half full....; and I would expect that the insurance and maintenance cost on the BT-67 to be quire reasonable.

Should the Cessna 408 work in arctic conditions - it would probably replace some of the Twin Otters for passenger and cargo transport for those locations. At least then you are talking about similar size and capacity aircraft.

Have a great day,
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 21708
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Cessna SkyCourier Development and Testing Thread

Mon Feb 08, 2021 10:58 pm

2175301 wrote:
lightsaber wrote:
The BT-67 will lose some orders to the 408. But until the 408 proves itself in the cold, it will be a slow transition.

This is the DC-3/BT-67 long term replacement. But I must emphasize long term. The transition over will take decades and will be based on insurance and maintenance costs more than anything else.

Lightsaber


While their might be some DC-3's and BT-67's that will be replaced by the Cessna 408, I think you are incorrect that this is its replacement even if it should prove to work in arctic conditions.

The DC-3 and BT-67 is twice the size of the Cessna 408. No one is flying DC-3's and BT-67's half full....; and I would expect that the insurance and maintenance cost on the BT-67 to be quire reasonable.

Should the Cessna 408 work in arctic conditions - it would probably replace some of the Twin Otters for passenger and cargo transport for those locations. At least then you are talking about similar size and capacity aircraft.

Have a great day,

BT-67 up to 11,000lb
http://blog.covingtonaircraft.com/2020/ ... f%20volume.


Everything I found was 19 passengers, but I didn't find a definitive link as the old planes could carry more.

The cessna SkyCourier (408): 19 pax or 6,000 lb

So yes, the BT-67 carries more. I personally think more than half could be replaced by the 408, but that is just my opinion.

Lightsaber
5 months without TV. The best decision of my life.
 
2175301
Posts: 2052
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 11:19 am

Re: Cessna SkyCourier Development and Testing Thread

Tue Feb 09, 2021 2:14 am

Lightsaber: All the cargo BT-67's are being operated in arctic conditions. I believe that there are only 4 of them at this point, with several more ordered. I understand current cost is about $9 Million. The operators either used to operate DC 3's or in some cases still do alongside the new BT-67's.

No BT-67's have been built for passenger service. The original DC-3 had a passenger capacity of 32 (there are many references). The BT-67 is I believe in the range of a meter+ longer (they have to move the nose to keep the props behind the pilots should the props disintegrate in service, and I have heard Basler state that a potential passenger configuration was 36 (I live fairly close to Oshkosh).

Have a great day,
 
Okcflyer
Posts: 782
Joined: Sat May 23, 2015 11:10 pm

Re: Cessna SkyCourier Development and Testing Thread

Tue Feb 09, 2021 2:40 am

2175301 wrote:
Lightsaber: All the cargo BT-67's are being operated in arctic conditions. I believe that there are only 4 of them at this point, with several more ordered. I understand current cost is about $9 Million. The operators either used to operate DC 3's or in some cases still do alongside the new BT-67's.

No BT-67's have been built for passenger service. The original DC-3 had a passenger capacity of 32 (there are many references). The BT-67 is I believe in the range of a meter+ longer (they have to move the nose to keep the props behind the pilots should the props disintegrate in service, and I have heard Basler state that a potential passenger configuration was 36 (I live fairly close to Oshkosh).

Have a great day,


Pretty sure it was stretched for weight and balance purposes, and nothing to do with the props. The PT6’s are way lighter than the original radial props. Note the PT6’s burn more fuel (turbine engines are less fuel efficient) and range actually dropped on the conversions compared to the old DC3 / WASP
 
Okcflyer
Posts: 782
Joined: Sat May 23, 2015 11:10 pm

Re: Cessna SkyCourier Development and Testing Thread

Tue Feb 09, 2021 2:44 am

eeightning wrote:
It strikes me as a plane for an organization that doesn't pay for it's own fuel and doesn't need much speed or range.
It is as simple as a 20,000lb twin turbine airplane can be.
Low-tech strutted wing, fixed gear, unpressurized, with very big engines (to deal with ice and fit with jets in terminal area) for what it does (compare to the BT-67, or Shorts 360 capability on the same power). I wonder if the bow will be on the high side for such a simple plane?
It will probably be the easiest to maintain, easiest to fly, cheapest to insure, cheapest to build plane of this size ever built. Funny thing - the DC-3 once fit that category. Now the BT-67 is the competition that will lose to the 408. Not because it isn't a more efficient airplane, but because it is too hard to build/fly/maintain.

This 50-200 nm segment is where electric aircraft have the potential to become commercially viable. If fuel stays cheap, and the cost of carbon remains the responsibility of future gens, Cessna will probably make a thousand of these, make parts for 50 years, and make bank all day long. And electric planes will remain the province of weirdos in ultralights, and personal drone transport scam companies.


I still haven’t wrapped my head around why the decision to install so much HP. It does appear to be excessive. The only thing I can think of is for a high level of single engine performance. Often times twins in this range can be quite dangerous if an engine fails. I imagine the 408 will perform quite well in this condition.
 
2175301
Posts: 2052
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 11:19 am

Re: Cessna SkyCourier Development and Testing Thread

Tue Feb 09, 2021 8:04 am

Okcflyer wrote:
2175301 wrote:
Lightsaber: All the cargo BT-67's are being operated in arctic conditions. I believe that there are only 4 of them at this point, with several more ordered. I understand current cost is about $9 Million. The operators either used to operate DC 3's or in some cases still do alongside the new BT-67's.

No BT-67's have been built for passenger service. The original DC-3 had a passenger capacity of 32 (there are many references). The BT-67 is I believe in the range of a meter+ longer (they have to move the nose to keep the props behind the pilots should the props disintegrate in service, and I have heard Basler state that a potential passenger configuration was 36 (I live fairly close to Oshkosh).

Have a great day,


Pretty sure it was stretched for weight and balance purposes, and nothing to do with the props. The PT6’s are way lighter than the original radial props. Note the PT6’s burn more fuel (turbine engines are less fuel efficient) and range actually dropped on the conversions compared to the old DC3 / WASP


The added plug was for pilot safety due to prop position once you put a turbine on the DC-3 frame.

Please watch this 8 minute video... as it has the best visual comparison. Watch it also if you like to see a C-46 and Electra's and other historic aircraft.

Turbine DC-3 vs. Regular DC-3
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GfgC5DROP-M

Have a great day,
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 21708
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Cessna SkyCourier Development and Testing Thread

Tue Feb 09, 2021 1:33 pm

Are there any known sales campaigns for the SkyCourier? As exciting as the FedEx order is, there needs to be more volume. I can see a large quantity selling, but I haven't heard anything about other potential buyers.

Lightsaber
5 months without TV. The best decision of my life.
 
User avatar
alberchico
Posts: 3286
Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 5:52 am

Re: Cessna SkyCourier Development and Testing Thread

Tue Feb 09, 2021 3:38 pm

lightsaber wrote:
Are there any known sales campaigns for the SkyCourier? As exciting as the FedEx order is, there needs to be more volume. I can see a large quantity selling, but I haven't heard anything about other potential buyers.

Lightsaber


Based on this official Cessna image, it looks like at one point it was pitched to the Mexican air force. Makes sense as the Caravan has had considerable success in the military market.

Image
short summary of every jewish holiday: they tried to kill us ,we won , lets eat !
 
2175301
Posts: 2052
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 11:19 am

Re: Cessna SkyCourier Development and Testing Thread

Tue Feb 09, 2021 4:00 pm

lightsaber wrote:
Are there any known sales campaigns for the SkyCourier? As exciting as the FedEx order is, there needs to be more volume. I can see a large quantity selling, but I haven't heard anything about other potential buyers.

Lightsaber



As previously discussed in this thread... It is very unlikely to be any new orders until after it has entered service and its actually operating parameters are demonstrated in real life. Cessna has several years of orders in hand with FedEx. There is plenty of time for other companies to order after it enters service. Aircraft this small do not have multi-year lead times on key parts.

Have a great day,
 
CDGIAD
Posts: 112
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2018 3:26 pm

Re: Cessna SkyCourier Development and Testing Thread

Sun Mar 14, 2021 10:13 pm

Does anyone have updates on the testing and production?
when is FedEx due to receive its first plane?
 
MO11
Posts: 1686
Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2017 5:07 pm

Re: Cessna SkyCourier Development and Testing Thread

Sun Mar 14, 2021 10:26 pm

CDGIAD wrote:
Does anyone have updates on the testing and production?
when is FedEx due to receive its first plane?


Second half of this year.
 
User avatar
alberchico
Posts: 3286
Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 5:52 am

Re: Cessna SkyCourier Development and Testing Thread

Tue Mar 23, 2021 12:47 am

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hRjgTrp ... oExecutiva

Someone uploaded video of a walkaround tour of the aircraft, apparently intended for prospective customers. We finally get a good look at the cockpit !
short summary of every jewish holiday: they tried to kill us ,we won , lets eat !
 
User avatar
Devilfish
Posts: 7324
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:52 am

Re: Cessna SkyCourier Development and Testing Thread

Tue Mar 23, 2021 1:37 am

That is one slick cockpit! :bigthumbsup:
"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
 
FlyingElvii
Posts: 1226
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2017 10:53 pm

Re: Cessna SkyCourier Development and Testing Thread

Tue Mar 23, 2021 2:08 am

alberchico wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hRjgTrpKhnw&ab_channel=TAMAvia%C3%A7%C3%A3oExecutiva

Someone uploaded video of a walkaround tour of the aircraft, apparently intended for prospective customers. We finally get a good look at the cockpit !

I have stated from the beginning that this aircraft is a game-changer, and will see significant world-wide demand.

Simple, powerful engines that are already widely available, with plug-and-Garmin electronics that are no more complicated than any modern Cirrus. It can be worked on by nearly any “Jet Center” level maintenance op on the planet. And don’t count out the importance of US-based Textron worldwide support, either.

The quick change ability opens up all kinds of new service possibilities.

This has the potential to be something really special, but I don’t underestimate Textron’s ability to screw it up due to greed, either.
 
wjcandee
Posts: 10281
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2000 12:50 am

Re: Cessna SkyCourier Development and Testing Thread

Tue Mar 23, 2021 4:53 am

Given the large engines and significant thrust asymmetry likely in an engine-out, do we think that Cessna is considering something like the IS&S ThrustSense autothrottle that is a hot item now on the King Air? Its "LifeGuard" feature prevents loss of control in engine-out situations (like the one in Texas a while back) by providing Vmca protection all the way down to the stall warning, reducing power in the operating engine to prevent loss of control and then providing maximum available power within the control envelope until the pilot gets back above Vmca.
 
CX747
Posts: 6572
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:54 am

Re: Cessna SkyCourier Development and Testing Thread

Wed Mar 31, 2021 1:07 am

alberchico wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hRjgTrpKhnw&ab_channel=TAMAvia%C3%A7%C3%A3oExecutiva

Someone uploaded video of a walkaround tour of the aircraft, apparently intended for prospective customers. We finally get a good look at the cockpit !


Was already impressed with the aircraft. Now I am more or less a believer. Simple, well thought out, with rugged equipment that is known to hold up.

The test fleet of 3 aircraft just went over 700+ hours.

https://www.avweb.com/aviation-news/ces ... elerating/
"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
 
User avatar
ramprat74
Posts: 1375
Joined: Wed Dec 17, 2003 6:01 pm

Re: Cessna SkyCourier Development and Testing Thread

Wed Mar 31, 2021 2:30 am

What kind of loader will Fedex be using to load/unload this aircraft? A normal cargo loader would be too tall. Fork lift only?
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 7395
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: Cessna SkyCourier Development and Testing Thread

Wed Mar 31, 2021 2:44 am

wjcandee wrote:
Given the large engines and significant thrust asymmetry likely in an engine-out, do we think that Cessna is considering something like the IS&S ThrustSense autothrottle that is a hot item now on the King Air? Its "LifeGuard" feature prevents loss of control in engine-out situations (like the one in Texas a while back) by providing Vmca protection all the way down to the stall warning, reducing power in the operating engine to prevent loss of control and then providing maximum available power within the control envelope until the pilot gets back above Vmca.


While a good idea to have thrust asymmetry protection, it should be much better tested and performance than a KingAir as it’s a Part 25 plane.
 
HPRamper
Posts: 5144
Joined: Sat May 14, 2005 4:22 am

Re: Cessna SkyCourier Development and Testing Thread

Wed Mar 31, 2021 8:22 am

ramprat74 wrote:
What kind of loader will Fedex be using to load/unload this aircraft? A normal cargo loader would be too tall. Fork lift only?

FX would never use a forklift. It's against company policy to even lift a loaded container with a forklift, interfacing with a plane would be out of the question. Some new type of dedicated loader will be used, or FX will just choose to bulk it and skip the containers. We have gotten very little (zero) communication from corporate on the subject.
 
dcs921
Posts: 107
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 4:40 pm

Re: Cessna SkyCourier Development and Testing Thread

Wed Mar 31, 2021 5:12 pm

HPRamper wrote:
ramprat74 wrote:
What kind of loader will Fedex be using to load/unload this aircraft? A normal cargo loader would be too tall. Fork lift only?

FX would never use a forklift. It's against company policy to even lift a loaded container with a forklift, interfacing with a plane would be out of the question. Some new type of dedicated loader will be used, or FX will just choose to bulk it and skip the containers. We have gotten very little (zero) communication from corporate on the subject.


They could use loaders similar to these below. Using loaders like these will give them the possiblity of eliminating some tug and dolly equipment.

https://www.jbtc.com/en/north-america/aerotech/products-and-services/ground-support-equipment/cargo-loaders/falcon

https://www.jbtc.com/en/north-america/aerotech/products-and-services/ground-support-equipment/cargo-loaders/clt-8-loader-transporter
 
HPRamper
Posts: 5144
Joined: Sat May 14, 2005 4:22 am

Re: Cessna SkyCourier Development and Testing Thread

Wed Mar 31, 2021 6:00 pm

dcs921 wrote:
HPRamper wrote:
ramprat74 wrote:
What kind of loader will Fedex be using to load/unload this aircraft? A normal cargo loader would be too tall. Fork lift only?

FX would never use a forklift. It's against company policy to even lift a loaded container with a forklift, interfacing with a plane would be out of the question. Some new type of dedicated loader will be used, or FX will just choose to bulk it and skip the containers. We have gotten very little (zero) communication from corporate on the subject.


They could use loaders similar to these below. Using loaders like these will give them the possiblity of eliminating some tug and dolly equipment.

https://www.jbtc.com/en/north-america/aerotech/products-and-services/ground-support-equipment/cargo-loaders/falcon

https://www.jbtc.com/en/north-america/aerotech/products-and-services/ground-support-equipment/cargo-loaders/clt-8-loader-transporter

Those, especially the first one, look ideal. And we already use JBT, so the groundwork would be there already.
 
User avatar
Spacepope
Posts: 5176
Joined: Tue Dec 28, 1999 11:10 am

Re: Cessna SkyCourier Development and Testing Thread

Wed Mar 31, 2021 6:52 pm

HPRamper wrote:
dcs921 wrote:
HPRamper wrote:
FX would never use a forklift. It's against company policy to even lift a loaded container with a forklift, interfacing with a plane would be out of the question. Some new type of dedicated loader will be used, or FX will just choose to bulk it and skip the containers. We have gotten very little (zero) communication from corporate on the subject.


They could use loaders similar to these below. Using loaders like these will give them the possiblity of eliminating some tug and dolly equipment.

https://www.jbtc.com/en/north-america/aerotech/products-and-services/ground-support-equipment/cargo-loaders/falcon

https://www.jbtc.com/en/north-america/aerotech/products-and-services/ground-support-equipment/cargo-loaders/clt-8-loader-transporter

Those, especially the first one, look ideal. And we already use JBT, so the groundwork would be there already.


Especially since the first bullet point in their description is "Transfer containerized cargo from Cessna, ATR, and CRJ aircraft"

I don't know any other Cessnas doing the container cargo thing so perhaps they are aiming right at FedEx.
The last of the famous international playboys
 
2175301
Posts: 2052
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 11:19 am

Re: Cessna SkyCourier Development and Testing Thread

Wed Mar 31, 2021 8:37 pm

Spacepope wrote:
I don't know any other Cessnas doing the container cargo thing so perhaps they are aiming right at FedEx.


FedEx asked Cessna to design this aircraft - and I understand specified LD3 capability; and then ordered 50 of them (which allowed Cessna to proceed with development). So, I do expect that this aircraft targets FedEx, as they requested.

Cessna did not just develop this aircraft and then go hunting for customers. FedEx requested it.

I do admit that Cessna might have asked various potential customers if they were looking for a modern aircraft in this segment without having spent much money developing exact size and concepts. FedEx might have responded to such an inquiry. Or FedEx might have just approached Cessna.

Cessna did expand this aircraft with the option for passenger service. I'm not sure how many sales they will get with that. I suspect that most sales will be cargo aircraft - and all over most of the world at that.

Have a great day,
 
User avatar
FiscAutTecGarte
Posts: 263
Joined: Tue Dec 24, 2019 6:40 pm

Re: Cessna SkyCourier Development and Testing Thread

Wed Mar 31, 2021 8:44 pm

It was nice to see a fully painted bird in that video. Looking forward to seeing this fly for FedEx..
learning never stops...

FischAutoTechGarten is the full handle and it reflects my interest. It's abbreviated to fit A.net short usernames.
 
User avatar
Spacepope
Posts: 5176
Joined: Tue Dec 28, 1999 11:10 am

Re: Cessna SkyCourier Development and Testing Thread

Wed Mar 31, 2021 10:52 pm

2175301 wrote:
Spacepope wrote:
I don't know any other Cessnas doing the container cargo thing so perhaps they are aiming right at FedEx.


FedEx asked Cessna to design this aircraft - and I understand specified LD3 capability; and then ordered 50 of them (which allowed Cessna to proceed with development). So, I do expect that this aircraft targets FedEx, as they requested.

Cessna did not just develop this aircraft and then go hunting for customers. FedEx requested it.

I do admit that Cessna might have asked various potential customers if they were looking for a modern aircraft in this segment without having spent much money developing exact size and concepts. FedEx might have responded to such an inquiry. Or FedEx might have just approached Cessna.

Cessna did expand this aircraft with the option for passenger service. I'm not sure how many sales they will get with that. I suspect that most sales will be cargo aircraft - and all over most of the world at that.

Have a great day,


Hi

Yeah.

We were talking about that loading equipment here though, not the Skycourier.
The last of the famous international playboys
 
2175301
Posts: 2052
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 11:19 am

Re: Cessna SkyCourier Development and Testing Thread

Thu Apr 01, 2021 1:00 am

Spacepope wrote:
2175301 wrote:
Spacepope wrote:
I don't know any other Cessnas doing the container cargo thing so perhaps they are aiming right at FedEx.


FedEx asked Cessna to design this aircraft - and I understand specified LD3 capability; and then ordered 50 of them (which allowed Cessna to proceed with development). So, I do expect that this aircraft targets FedEx, as they requested.

Cessna did not just develop this aircraft and then go hunting for customers. FedEx requested it.

I do admit that Cessna might have asked various potential customers if they were looking for a modern aircraft in this segment without having spent much money developing exact size and concepts. FedEx might have responded to such an inquiry. Or FedEx might have just approached Cessna.

Cessna did expand this aircraft with the option for passenger service. I'm not sure how many sales they will get with that. I suspect that most sales will be cargo aircraft - and all over most of the world at that.

Have a great day,


Hi

Yeah.

We were talking about that loading equipment here though, not the Skycourier.


My mistake. And I agree with you... they are targeting FedEx initially - and any other companies the jump on the bandwagon; which will certainly occur if the SkyCourier performs even close to expected.

Have a great day,
  • 1
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8

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