lightsaber wrote:

Now that is interesting. I know about the A320P2F, I didn't realize the A321s were already being converted. For US registered frames, I know how to look up hours/cycles, is there a way to find out how many hours/cycles this frame has on it?

Lightsaber

leleko747 wrote:

I wonder why it took so long to have freighter conversions for the A320 family. The Boeing 737 have been a freighter since a long time ago, with QC and converted versions of the B737-200 being available by the 70s if I remember well. The 737NG also took a while to be converted (not counting the 700C version, with side cargo door).

AAMDanny wrote:

A320/A321P2F will be a game changer on on the narrow bodied jet freighter market, especially since B737F and B757F do not have containerised lower deck capabilities.

Reddevil556 wrote:

AAMDanny wrote:

A320/A321P2F will be a game changer on on the narrow bodied jet freighter market, especially since B737F and B757F do not have containerised lower deck capabilities.

Considering how popular the 757 has been as a freighter, that point appears to be irrelevant to freight haulers.

Reddevil556 wrote:

AAMDanny wrote:

A320/A321P2F will be a game changer on on the narrow bodied jet freighter market, especially since B737F and B757F do not have containerised lower deck capabilities.

Considering how popular the 757 has been as a freighter, that point appears to be irrelevant to freight haulers.

amstone17 wrote:

Reddevil556 wrote:

AAMDanny wrote:

A320/A321P2F will be a game changer on on the narrow bodied jet freighter market, especially since B737F and B757F do not have containerised lower deck capabilities.

Considering how popular the 757 has been as a freighter, that point appears to be irrelevant to freight haulers.

It's not irrelevant. The issue is until now no one has had somethign 757 sized that's fully containerized top and bottom, now there is, and it will be popular. A lot of time is spent stacking freight in 737/757 bellies, even with the slide plates in some 757s. A fully containerized aircraft with just a small bulk hold for last minute additions will prove popular.
The A320P2F also has this capability. As the 757s run out of time and become too expensive to maintain, operators will enjoy the shift to an A321 that can be turned around much more quickly.

Channex757 wrote:

Reddevil556 wrote:

AAMDanny wrote:

A320/A321P2F will be a game changer on on the narrow bodied jet freighter market, especially since B737F and B757F do not have containerised lower deck capabilities.

Considering how popular the 757 has been as a freighter, that point appears to be irrelevant to freight haulers.

Irrelevant.

The containerised lower hold will be attractive for freight haulers who need a quick turn on overnights. The bins can easily be loaded if the freight or maybe just parcels is ready on the ramp in containers.
I can see the parcel haulers being interested in this new way of efficiently working.

Spacepope wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

Now that is interesting. I know about the A320P2F, I didn't realize the A321s were already being converted. For US registered frames, I know how to look up hours/cycles, is there a way to find out how many hours/cycles this frame has on it?

Lightsaber

Been waiting on this for a while now, glad to see someone has made progress. Precision (down in Florida IIRC) cut first metal well over a year ago on their A321 prototype but still no roll out. IIRC no A320P2F has been completed yet and most of the orders are for the A321, so that was prioritized. At least one of the conversion programs is fairly complicated with the relocation of the L1 door.

lightsaber wrote:

I agree that high resale values of the A320 and in particular A321 stopped this from happening. I speculate the A321NEO economics is freeing up frames at values that tip the scale.

I also agree the MASSIVE parts availability virtually guaranteed for 30+ years on the A32x family makes this an attractive conversion. The KC-135, 747NG freighters, and P-8 remove any worry on the CFM engines, excluding the absolute oldest variants.

For the V2500, I speculate that IAE/Pratt was aggressive on the Embraer KC-390 bid to ensure customers know parts will be available long term.

Spacepope wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

Now that is interesting. I know about the A320P2F, I didn't realize the A321s were already being converted. For US registered frames, I know how to look up hours/cycles, is there a way to find out how many hours/cycles this frame has on it?

Lightsaber

Been waiting on this for a while now, glad to see someone has made progress. Precision (down in Florida IIRC) cut first metal well over a year ago on their A321 prototype but still no roll out. IIRC no A320P2F has been completed yet and most of the orders are for the A321, so that was prioritized. At least one of the conversion programs is fairly complicated with the relocation of the L1 door.

It was destined to happen.

I'm curious as to the age of the converted aircraft (in cycles/hours).

Lightsaber

Reddevil556 wrote:

AAMDanny wrote:

A320/A321P2F will be a game changer on on the narrow bodied jet freighter market, especially since B737F and B757F do not have containerised lower deck capabilities.

Considering how popular the 757 has been as a freighter, that point appears to be irrelevant to freight haulers.

danipawa wrote:

2 ex Thomas cook going to convertion too..

Antaras wrote:

So sad to realize that Airbus doesn't provide an official A321F that operators have to find a third-party group (IAI, GECAS,...) for a conversion.

juliuswong wrote:

Antaras wrote:

So sad to realize that Airbus doesn't provide an official A321F that operators have to find a third-party group (IAI, GECAS,...) for a conversion.

I think it is more of Airbus line is sold out for pax version, can't fit in cargo version. With them changing A380 production lines to A321's, it can be considered.

N14AZ wrote:

There is a picture of D-ANJA in the www but according to the forum rules I cannot post it here (it’s not that spectacular anyway. Being an ex-Onur-Air aircraft, the winglet has already the correct colour for its future operator...).

This article includes a picture of how she will look like once being painted:


Source: https://www.ch-aviation.com/portal/news ... om-vallair

exFWAOONW wrote:

How many freight operators demand a quick turn? UPS doesn't seem too concerned with the ability to load containers in the belly with all the 757s they fly. I wouldn't be surprised if they prefer bulk-loading just so they can pack in more freight.

mxaxai wrote:

Cool. One question though: Why does it have a German registration?
I know that there is a company in Dresden who do P2F conversions but I doubt that they have a second base in Singapore.

mxaxai wrote:

Cool. One question though: Why does it have a German registration?
I know that there is a company in Dresden who do P2F conversions but I doubt that they have a second base in Singapore.

Antaras wrote:

So sad to realize that Airbus doesn't provide an official A321F that operators have to find a third-party group (IAI, GECAS,...) for a conversion.

Antaras wrote:

So sad to realize that Airbus doesn't provide an official A321F that operators have to find a third-party group (IAI, GECAS,...) for a conversion.

BoeingVista wrote:

N14AZ wrote:

There is a picture of D-ANJA in the www but according to the forum rules I cannot post it here (it’s not that spectacular anyway. Being an ex-Onur-Air aircraft, the winglet has already the correct colour for its future operator...).

This article includes a picture of how she will look like once being painted:


Source: https://www.ch-aviation.com/portal/news ... om-vallair

Thank God, hopefully it will be used east coast --> Perth. Road freight times have recently blown out to 2 weeks which is ridiculous.

Notice door L1 on the port side has been re-positioned further forward towards the cockpit

debonair wrote:

debonair wrote:

Also, the L1 door looks very small, more like an escape hatch - or is it still the same standard A321 door, just relocated?

N14AZ wrote:

debonair wrote:

Also, the L1 door looks very small, more like an escape hatch - or is it still the same standard A321 door, just relocated?

No, I think you are right (example pic of an A 321 from the same angle/distance:

Amiga500 wrote:

Def a smaller door.

I'm mildly surprised its worthwhile for them to remove all the other doors (after making space for the large cargo door) - I know they'll save a bit of weight - but the rework cost must surely be in the hundreds of thousands - and the recertification cost probably another factor of 10 on that.

Clydenairways wrote:

Amiga500 wrote:

Def a smaller door.

I'm mildly surprised its worthwhile for them to remove all the other doors (after making space for the large cargo door) - I know they'll save a bit of weight - but the rework cost must surely be in the hundreds of thousands - and the recertification cost probably another factor of 10 on that.

Maybe it enables an additional pallet position to be accommodated?

Amiga500 wrote:

Possibly - I don't know how the doors would impact on the floor rails to that extent though? [are the doors much thicker than the fuselage frames?]

ei146 wrote:

Amiga500 wrote:

Possibly - I don't know how the doors would impact on the floor rails to that extent though? [are the doors much thicker than the fuselage frames?]

Are the rails the real problem? How about getting in and out if the space in front of the door is occupied by a Palette?

juliuswong wrote:

danipawa wrote:

2 ex Thomas cook going to convertion too..

That would be MSN 1238 G-DHJH, close to 20 years young. Can't find the other one.

SpaceshipDC10 wrote:

The aircraft pictured is a 757-200PF (Package Freighter) specially built for overnight parcel service by companies such as UPS. The smaller cockpit door, closer to the nose allowed to relocate the separation between cockpit and main deck cargo hold to gain enough space in the main deck cargo hold to carry another container of paying parcels. As far as I can tell, only UPS received new-built -200PF. However I seem to remember that another carrier, perhaps ET converted one or more aircraft to such configuration.

exFWAOONW wrote:

How many freight operators demand a quick turn? UPS doesn't seem too concerned with the ability to load containers in the belly with all the 757s they fly. I wouldn't be surprised if they prefer bulk-loading just so they can pack in more freight.

Northpole wrote:

exFWAOONW wrote:

How many freight operators demand a quick turn? UPS doesn't seem too concerned with the ability to load containers in the belly with all the 757s they fly. I wouldn't be surprised if they prefer bulk-loading just so they can pack in more freight.

How many freight operators would rather have their airplanes in the air instead of on the ground ? How can the number of airplanes in the fleet be reduced by pre-loading containers and reducing the time on the ground ... planes makes money in the air not on the ground being on or off-loaded - thats my thoughts

Amiga500 wrote:

Def a smaller door.

I'm mildly surprised its worthwhile for them to remove all the other doors (after making space for the large cargo door) - I know they'll save a bit of weight - but the rework cost must surely be in the hundreds of thousands - and the recertification cost probably another factor of 10 on that.

B777LRF wrote:

On containerised vs loose loaded bulks

The B757-200SF conversion was offered with a containerised lower-deck, and the original customer (DHL) actually ordered them in that configuration. I believe it was a Telair conversion, and specially made ULDs were designed and purchased for the purpose. It then transpired that the investment in dedicated GSE at a large number of hubs and gateways would make the proposition uneconomical. Since then, and this is more than 20 years ago, the GSE is now in service at much larger number of airports, as they're used on the A320 series. This makes the proposition economically viable again, and there are a large number of advantages;

* The ability to do a finer sort, by having more handling units available. This will allow smaller stations to build ULDs carrying only freight for a single destination, thereby decreasing the amount of freight to be sorted at a hub
* It will allow faster un-loading and loading times, which means inbound freight reaches the sort faster and the cut-off point for outbound can be brought closer to STD, both of which will give the hub a larger window for sorting
* It will decrease the chances of misconnection, as less freight has to be resorted and more can be transported directly from one aircraft to another at a hub
* It will allow for quicker turn-around times at transit stops, not only because the un-loading/loading process is faster, but also because the increased number of ULDs available will allow for a more "clever" loading, meaning the transit stop will have fewer ULDs to un-load and load.

Totally agree > furthermore if it is ok (?)- I would like to add that a lot of (air)-cargo originates - or have a final destination - far away from the airport from which the cargo is being transported by air -airlifted - where a truck-transport is used. An example from my own country : Aircargo from the three major airports in Sweden ARN - GOT and MMA/MMX to overseas destinations like North America- South America -Middle East - Far East and Australia/NZ is not flown out of Sweden - the cargo is consolidated and containerized and then beeing sent by special trucks( overnight ) with equipment enabling the containers to be rolled on and off the truck for quick unloading/loading. From the major European airports like Frankfurt- Schipol /AMS - Luxembourg with lots of international connections the cargo is then airlifted.
I would assume that the construction of future airplanes takes the measurements of the different " airfreight-containers" into consideration since a manual handling of not only cargo but also luggage belongs to the past.





On the re-positioned L1 door

This option is also carried out on the 757PCF, which allows for 15 full positions instead of 14 and a half on the SF. It's about providing more volume, and the benefit thereof outweighs the cost of conversion. The door can be made smaller, as it's only required for evacuation of 5 people or so. The slide is also removed, and replaced by a inertial reel; rules are different when you're only carrying crew and not fare paying passengers. I imagine the FWD law will be relocated to where the R1 door is, as it's done on the 757PCF. There will be no galley as such, probably just a water boiler and perhaps an oven.

On doors

All exit doors apart from L1 are usually blocked on converted freighters, as it is cost prohibitive to plug such large holes. The inside of the doors are stripped and they are covered with the cargo hold lining. The doors can be reactivated, as DHL did with a few of their 757s for the purpose of carrying grooms on horse charters.

FlyRow wrote:

Damm it takes a lot of work for the A321 to be able to cary Fish.