The new purpose-built freighter ATR took off today.

The ATR72-600F offers a large cargo door and can accommodate industry-standard pallets and containers with payload of 19,600 pounds and a useable volume of 2,666 cubic feet range of 900 nm.

The aircraft is part of a 2017 FedEx order for 50 examples.


https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EiDD2kQWAAA ... name=large

I have always had this dream that a big cargo airline would open a regional Central American/Caribbean/Mexico hub in the region. GUA is building a cargo-only airport close to its Pacific coast. But one can only dream.

Anyways, such a beautiful aircraft and an excellent strategic purchase by FedEx.

There are a lot of small cities, remote towns, islands that this will be a great for, especially for relatively large cargo items.
I wonder if this model and version can be used in winter environments, has improved de-icing systems that would expand its use year round into the northern USA including Alaska, Canada, Northern Europe, Russia, parts of China.

I always prefered the look of, and performance from actually flying on the Q400 many many times,,, But i've gotta say, that ATR72 in FedEx Colors looks Really Really amazing. It will be interesting to see how the 900 nm Range will work with a full payload and fuel, and with climbing to cruise altitude during abnormal events like a large storm in the way that would take too long to fly around. But it looks pretty damn good.

Will it be possible to retrofit older ATRs to be able to accommodate containers?

SXDFC wrote:

Will it be possible to retrofit older ATRs to be able to accommodate containers?

Cebu Pacific has one 72-500 (opb Cebgo) that was converted recently to a freighter.

ltbewr wrote:

There are a lot of small cities, remote towns, islands that this will be a great for, especially for relatively large cargo items.
I wonder if this model and version can be used in winter environments, has improved de-icing systems that would expand its use year round into the northern USA including Alaska, Canada, Northern Europe, Russia, parts of China.

ATRs have been flying safely in Scandinavia, Canada and Russia for decades. There have even been some in Greenland from time to time.

Unless plans have changed, these will replace the existing contractor operated FedEx ATRs all over the world.

SXDFC wrote:

Will it be possible to retrofit older ATRs to be able to accommodate containers?

The large cargo door (LCD) conversion has been around for 18 years. First was an ATR 72-202 converted in 2002. The big downside is that the conversion adds about a ton of weight, eating into the payload. By building them as freighters from new, you should make up some of that by omitting any of the passenger-specific fittings.

Boeing757rb211 wrote:

It will be interesting to see how the 900 nm Range will work with a full payload and fuel, and with climbing to cruise altitude during abnormal events like a large storm in the way that would take too long to fly around. But it looks pretty damn good.

900 nm is no problem for a fully loaded ATR 72. With 7 tons of cargo it should do almost 1400 nm. 6 tons will give you enough fuel for 1800 nm. At 5 tons of payload, you can fill the tanks completely and reach out as far as 2300 nm.

ltbewr wrote:

There are a lot of small cities, remote towns, islands that this will be a great for, especially for relatively large cargo items.
I wonder if this model and version can be used in winter environments, has improved de-icing systems that would expand its use year round into the northern USA including Alaska, Canada, Northern Europe, Russia, parts of China.

I am pretty sure ATR42/72 are operating in Yukon, Nunavut and NWT in Canada - well into the Artic circle. So the aircraft is reasonably "winterised" already.

SXDFC wrote:

Will it be possible to retrofit older ATRs to be able to accommodate containers?

There are third party conversions available including by one Israeli company. But i think this is the first ATR to be factory fitted with Cargo handling systems and the large cargo door.

Congrats to FedEx. With 19,600 pound of useful payload and great short field performance, the ATR is the perfect Caribbean island hopper.

More than likely this plane will be able to accept small containers and half pallets. I doubt your loading full 125’ PMC’s

JFKalumni wrote:

Congrats to FedEx. With 19,600 pound of useful payload and great short field performance, the ATR is the perfect Caribbean island hopper.

More than likely this plane will be able to accept small containers and half pallets. I doubt your loading full 125’ PMC’s

According to ATR

ULD capability
• 7x LD-3s
• 5x 88" x 108" palletts
• 9x 88" x 62" pallets
+ aft bulk cargo

Max Structural Payload 8,9 ton (19,600 lb)

And it has a larger cargo door to:

• Fwd Large Cargo Door 2.94 x 1.8 m (116” x 71”)
• Aft Upper Hinged Cargo Door in replacement of standard passenger door

AECM wrote:

JFKalumni wrote:

Congrats to FedEx. With 19,600 pound of useful payload and great short field performance, the ATR is the perfect Caribbean island hopper.

More than likely this plane will be able to accept small containers and half pallets. I doubt your loading full 125’ PMC’s

According to ATR

ULD capability
• 7x LD-3s
• 5x 88" x 108" palletts
• 9x 88" x 62" pallets
+ aft bulk cargo

Max Structural Payload 8,9 ton (19,600 lb)

And it has a larger cargo door to:

• Fwd Large Cargo Door 2.94 x 1.8 m (116” x 71”)
• Aft Upper Hinged Cargo Door in replacement of standard passenger door

Thanks. I would guess everything would be loaded on pallets. It’s nice to know that the ATR can carry LD-3’s but it’s probably restricted to light weight carbon LD-3’s like the A380. The high value RKN containers are probably too heavy for this application.

The 108’ pallets will be perfect for quick turnaround flights.

One thing to remember for FedEx especially is the majority of the routes it is going to be on capacity is the name of the game, not range. These aren’t doing MEM-MOT. They’re doing FAR-MOT. It’s about having a platform they can take containers off the jet and slide them right into the feeder aircraft. Same thing in reverse. Not having to handle all those packages is a tremendous time saver and allows early commits in the morning and later pickups in the PM.

I’d bet the overwhelming majority of flights these will operate on for FX are less than 400nm. It will be a great airframe for them.

Still waiting for the day 5X wises up and orders something. The current feeder network is really banked on wet leases of airframes that are all 30 years old. As e commerce continues to grow this probably isn’t going to be sustainable.

jetblueguy22 wrote:

One thing to remember for FedEx especially is the majority of the routes it is going to be on capacity is the name of the game, not range. These aren’t doing MEM-MOT. They’re doing FAR-MOT. It’s about having a platform they can take containers off the jet and slide them right into the feeder aircraft. Same thing in reverse. Not having to handle all those packages is a tremendous time saver and allows early commits in the morning and later pickups in the PM.

I’d bet the overwhelming majority of flights these will operate on for FX are less than 400nm. It will be a great airframe for them.

Still waiting for the day 5X wises up and orders something. The current feeder network is really banked on wet leases of airframes that are all 30 years old. As e commerce continues to grow this probably isn’t going to be sustainable.

I can only speak for the European network, but in Paris everything gets sent to the hub for sorting and then gets repackee back into the containers, regardless of how it arrives. For the ATRs it also goes into containers that are then emptied onto the belt loader by the aircraft.

The big difference is that the ATRs are bulk loaded, meaning they have an army of labourers manually packing each aircraft. Containers will save a lot of manpower, ease the mass and balance work and hopefully make the process a lot faster.

I think Fedex specified the aircraft with ATR for their needs. It's a big upgrade from previous variants / conversions.
Lean, mean, quiet and capable, no competition, might become successful..

ltbewr wrote:

There are a lot of small cities, remote towns, islands that this will be a great for, especially for relatively large cargo items.
I wonder if this model and version can be used in winter environments, has improved de-icing systems that would expand its use year round into the northern USA including Alaska, Canada, Northern Europe, Russia, parts of China.

If you're thinking about American Eagle Flight 4184, the de-icing boots have since been modified to reach further up the top of the wing and the old boots are no longer allowed to be installed; the ATRs are allowed to fly in icing conditions, and they do so safely.

jetblueguy22 wrote:

One thing to remember for FedEx especially is the majority of the routes it is going to be on capacity is the name of the game, not range. These aren’t doing MEM-MOT. They’re doing FAR-MOT. It’s about having a platform they can take containers off the jet and slide them right into the feeder aircraft. Same thing in reverse. Not having to handle all those packages is a tremendous time saver and allows early commits in the morning and later pickups in the PM.

I’d bet the overwhelming majority of flights these will operate on for FX are less than 400nm. It will be a great airframe for them.

Still waiting for the day 5X wises up and orders something. The current feeder network is really banked on wet leases of airframes that are all 30 years old. As e commerce continues to grow this probably isn’t going to be sustainable.

I don't think you'll see UPS in this market. They'll simply continue to use the contract feed until it simply can't do the job. Plus, I believe scope at UPS would require an ATR to be flown by UPS.

WayexTDI wrote:

ltbewr wrote:

There are a lot of small cities, remote towns, islands that this will be a great for, especially for relatively large cargo items.
I wonder if this model and version can be used in winter environments, has improved de-icing systems that would expand its use year round into the northern USA including Alaska, Canada, Northern Europe, Russia, parts of China.

If you're thinking about American Eagle Flight 4184, the de-icing boots have since been modified to reach further up the top of the wing and the old boots are no longer allowed to be installed; the ATRs are allowed to fly in icing conditions, and they do so safely.

I picked up on the roselawn hint as well, not thought about that crash in a while, were older aircraft retrofitted?

DiamondFlyer wrote:

jetblueguy22 wrote:

One thing to remember for FedEx especially is the majority of the routes it is going to be on capacity is the name of the game, not range. These aren’t doing MEM-MOT. They’re doing FAR-MOT. It’s about having a platform they can take containers off the jet and slide them right into the feeder aircraft. Same thing in reverse. Not having to handle all those packages is a tremendous time saver and allows early commits in the morning and later pickups in the PM.

I’d bet the overwhelming majority of flights these will operate on for FX are less than 400nm. It will be a great airframe for them.

Still waiting for the day 5X wises up and orders something. The current feeder network is really banked on wet leases of airframes that are all 30 years old. As e commerce continues to grow this probably isn’t going to be sustainable.

I don't think you'll see UPS in this market. They'll simply continue to use the contract feed until it simply can't do the job. Plus, I believe scope at UPS would require an ATR to be flown by UPS.

The UPS model sure gives us a variety of airframes though, Around here Bemidji does most of their flying with early-60's Queen Airs. While UPS doesn't have central control of the feeder fleet like Fedex tends to, their model seems to work well enough for them especially to podunk mountain towns like out here.

FedEx does seem to have an advantage of several decent sized airframes between 757 and, say, a B1900D. UPS feeders tend to be much more heavily concentrated on the small end.

FedEx is also the launch customer for the Cessna SkyCourier, able to carry 3 LD3's with a max payload of 6,000 lb. At 5,000# the range is 400 nm. So 3 LD3's here and 7 in the ATR-72. If 2,000 is the average full weight of an LD3 that puts the ATR-72 at 14,000 lb payload, well down from the 19K noted above, so a decent range.

My point is that FedEx clearly wants to start using containers in the smaller feeder flights. They already have a fleet of planes that are bulk loaded. The size of the SkyCourier and the ATR-72 being about twice that size fill in a big gap in FedEx's capability, either too small or too large before.

JayinKitsap wrote:

FedEx is also the launch customer for the Cessna SkyCourier, able to carry 3 LD3's with a max payload of 6,000 lb. At 5,000# the range is 400 nm. So 3 LD3's here and 7 in the ATR-72. If 2,000 is the average full weight of an LD3 that puts the ATR-72 at 14,000 lb payload, well down from the 19K noted above, so a decent range.

My point is that FedEx clearly wants to start using containers in the smaller feeder flights. They already have a fleet of planes that are bulk loaded. The size of the SkyCourier and the ATR-72 being about twice that size fill in a big gap in FedEx's capability, either too small or too large before.

Having flown package feed freight in the past, I'll clue you into something. Weight means nothing to UPS and FedEx. They'll bulk the planes out well before they hit a weight limitation. There's nothing wrong with bulk loading when you have to, but if you can have the small feed station load their freight into a can, it could potentially make for a later cutoff time in rural areas to make overnight freight. Eliminate the sort in the large city, LD3 comes straight off a 408 and goes straight onto the 757 or whatever FedEx has to IND/MEM.

TheWorm123 wrote:

WayexTDI wrote:

ltbewr wrote:

There are a lot of small cities, remote towns, islands that this will be a great for, especially for relatively large cargo items.
I wonder if this model and version can be used in winter environments, has improved de-icing systems that would expand its use year round into the northern USA including Alaska, Canada, Northern Europe, Russia, parts of China.

If you're thinking about American Eagle Flight 4184, the de-icing boots have since been modified to reach further up the top of the wing and the old boots are no longer allowed to be installed; the ATRs are allowed to fly in icing conditions, and they do so safely.

I picked up on the roselawn hint as well, not thought about that crash in a while, were older aircraft retrofitted?

There were ADs issued after the investigation was completed; so, yes, older aircraft were retrofitted.
Also, since the older style boots were discontinued, the retrofit would have been completed by attrition by now anyway, the de-icing boots don't last more have a few years.

Wouldn't be surprised if Amazon takes a look at these if they want to access areas that are too small for their current 767's/737's.

Compared with other turborpops, the ATR has a relatively thin wing. Not surprising, its designers came from Concorde, at de Havilland from the Beaver and Otter. The original ATR boots had to be modified (extended). The design was fully compliant with the applicable airworthiness requirements, which proved insufficient for super large droplets. See https://lessonslearned.faa.gov/ll_main.cfm?TabID=4&LLID=37&LLTypeID=2#null

All ATRs currently flying are safe to fly in any known icing conditions, provided the crew follow the procedures and switch on de-cing boots as requested. Surprisingly not all of them do and this causes some in-service events. To help crew detecting icing conditions, in addition to the usual rod providing visual evidence, ATR introduced a system monitoring the performance in real time, prompting an alert if it detects any degradation indicating potential ice accretion on the airframe.

WayexTDI wrote:

TheWorm123 wrote:

WayexTDI wrote:

If you're thinking about American Eagle Flight 4184, the de-icing boots have since been modified to reach further up the top of the wing and the old boots are no longer allowed to be installed; the ATRs are allowed to fly in icing conditions, and they do so safely.

I picked up on the roselawn hint as well, not thought about that crash in a while, were older aircraft retrofitted?

There were ADs issued after the investigation was completed; so, yes, older aircraft were retrofitted.
Also, since the older style boots were discontinued, the retrofit would have been completed by attrition by now anyway, the de-icing boots don't last more have a few years.

That crash was 26 years ago.

MavyWavyATR wrote:

Wouldn't be surprised if Amazon takes a look at these if they want to access areas that are too small for their current 767's/737's.

Amazon uses their fleet to shuttle between their own centers, not final mile.

They will have no interest in something this small.

is Fedex the only customer?

danipawa wrote:

is Fedex the only customer?

So far, yes, but I've been told the order has been increased somewhat over the initial 50. It should be noted that they will be operated by subcontractors, so expect them to be delivered to the likes of ASL Airlines and Mountain Air Cargo.

This is very cool. When I initially read the thread starter, I was impressed by the range/payload combination they were able to come up with. My first thought was northern Canada and most of Alaska plus the remote parts of the US Pacific NW.

rlwynn wrote:

WayexTDI wrote:

TheWorm123 wrote:

I picked up on the roselawn hint as well, not thought about that crash in a while, were older aircraft retrofitted?

There were ADs issued after the investigation was completed; so, yes, older aircraft were retrofitted.
Also, since the older style boots were discontinued, the retrofit would have been completed by attrition by now anyway, the de-icing boots don't last more have a few years.

That crash was 26 years ago.

And? Lessons were still learned, airframes from that time modified and the ATR is still flying. Your point?

ILNFlyer wrote:

This is very cool. When I initially read the thread starter, I was impressed by the range/payload combination they were able to come up with. My first thought was northern Canada and most of Alaska plus the remote parts of the US Pacific NW.

This ATR is too much plane for most of the small markets. Places like Port Angeles and Friday Harbor won't even need the new Skycourier, bulk loaded 208s are just fine for those markets.

Of the PNW I could see PSC and MFR being the right size/distance for this ATR. BLI and MVW the new Cessna. Also gives FX the option to do runs like OAK-MFR so they don't have to put that freight on a mainline plane and overfly their destination by hundreds of miles only to manually reload it onto multiple 208s going the other direction.

Necessity being the mother of invention.... FEDEx is really laying down some challenges for Textron and ATR.... both are responding with some nice purpose built aircraft.

Enjoying watching Tecnam, Textron, and ATR breathe new life in the Prop Market, no matter how specialized and niche the applications....

VSMUT wrote:

jetblueguy22 wrote:

One thing to remember for FedEx especially is the majority of the routes it is going to be on capacity is the name of the game, not range. These aren’t doing MEM-MOT. They’re doing FAR-MOT. It’s about having a platform they can take containers off the jet and slide them right into the feeder aircraft. Same thing in reverse. Not having to handle all those packages is a tremendous time saver and allows early commits in the morning and later pickups in the PM.

I’d bet the overwhelming majority of flights these will operate on for FX are less than 400nm. It will be a great airframe for them.

Still waiting for the day 5X wises up and orders something. The current feeder network is really banked on wet leases of airframes that are all 30 years old. As e commerce continues to grow this probably isn’t going to be sustainable.

I can only speak for the European network, but in Paris everything gets sent to the hub for sorting and then gets repackee back into the containers, regardless of how it arrives. For the ATRs it also goes into containers that are then emptied onto the belt loader by the aircraft.

The big difference is that the ATRs are bulk loaded, meaning they have an army of labourers manually packing each aircraft. Containers will save a lot of manpower, ease the mass and balance work and hopefully make the process a lot faster.

Cant speak for FX, but at 5X they do a lot of building level stuff. So the sort in SDF will build a container of stuff all going to one building. There has to be a certain threshold, but chances are if you’re filling an ATR you have enough to justify it.

DiamondFlyer wrote:

jetblueguy22 wrote:

One thing to remember for FedEx especially is the majority of the routes it is going to be on capacity is the name of the game, not range. These aren’t doing MEM-MOT. They’re doing FAR-MOT. It’s about having a platform they can take containers off the jet and slide them right into the feeder aircraft. Same thing in reverse. Not having to handle all those packages is a tremendous time saver and allows early commits in the morning and later pickups in the PM.

I’d bet the overwhelming majority of flights these will operate on for FX are less than 400nm. It will be a great airframe for them.

Still waiting for the day 5X wises up and orders something. The current feeder network is really banked on wet leases of airframes that are all 30 years old. As e commerce continues to grow this probably isn’t going to be sustainable.

I don't think you'll see UPS in this market. They'll simply continue to use the contract feed until it simply can't do the job. Plus, I believe scope at UPS would require an ATR to be flown by UPS.

The scope would make it a nightmare. But they will need to do something soon because much of the fleet they currently lease are either not dependable or too small. There isn’t a lot of aircraft that they can use to supplement what they already have.

jetblueguy22 wrote:

VSMUT wrote:

jetblueguy22 wrote:

One thing to remember for FedEx especially is the majority of the routes it is going to be on capacity is the name of the game, not range. These aren’t doing MEM-MOT. They’re doing FAR-MOT. It’s about having a platform they can take containers off the jet and slide them right into the feeder aircraft. Same thing in reverse. Not having to handle all those packages is a tremendous time saver and allows early commits in the morning and later pickups in the PM.

I’d bet the overwhelming majority of flights these will operate on for FX are less than 400nm. It will be a great airframe for them.

Still waiting for the day 5X wises up and orders something. The current feeder network is really banked on wet leases of airframes that are all 30 years old. As e commerce continues to grow this probably isn’t going to be sustainable.

I can only speak for the European network, but in Paris everything gets sent to the hub for sorting and then gets repackee back into the containers, regardless of how it arrives. For the ATRs it also goes into containers that are then emptied onto the belt loader by the aircraft.

The big difference is that the ATRs are bulk loaded, meaning they have an army of labourers manually packing each aircraft. Containers will save a lot of manpower, ease the mass and balance work and hopefully make the process a lot faster.

Cant speak for FX, but at 5X they do a lot of building level stuff. So the sort in SDF will build a container of stuff all going to one building. There has to be a certain threshold, but chances are if you’re filling an ATR you have enough to justify it.

Exactly. The container gets filled in MEM, flies to FSD, then gets moved from the jet to an ATR to fly to RAP. Rather than having to unload it from the container in FSD, then bulk load it onto a smaller freighter. I'm surprised UPS hasn't gone this route as well, but maybe the costs at UPS would just be too high to make it happen.

Spacepope wrote:

MavyWavyATR wrote:

Wouldn't be surprised if Amazon takes a look at these if they want to access areas that are too small for their current 767's/737's.

Amazon uses their fleet to shuttle between their own centers, not final mile.

They will have no interest in something this small.

I’d argue that while you are correct now, but that is going to change as the new delivery stations coming online become more rural. They’re going to be a necessity if they ever decide to completely remove the USPS and UPS from their network. No way they let transit times decrease because they do it in house. The whole point was it allowed them to speed up delivery times.

jetblueguy22 wrote:

VSMUT wrote:

jetblueguy22 wrote:

One thing to remember for FedEx especially is the majority of the routes it is going to be on capacity is the name of the game, not range. These aren’t doing MEM-MOT. They’re doing FAR-MOT. It’s about having a platform they can take containers off the jet and slide them right into the feeder aircraft. Same thing in reverse. Not having to handle all those packages is a tremendous time saver and allows early commits in the morning and later pickups in the PM.

I’d bet the overwhelming majority of flights these will operate on for FX are less than 400nm. It will be a great airframe for them.

Still waiting for the day 5X wises up and orders something. The current feeder network is really banked on wet leases of airframes that are all 30 years old. As e commerce continues to grow this probably isn’t going to be sustainable.

I can only speak for the European network, but in Paris everything gets sent to the hub for sorting and then gets repackee back into the containers, regardless of how it arrives. For the ATRs it also goes into containers that are then emptied onto the belt loader by the aircraft.

The big difference is that the ATRs are bulk loaded, meaning they have an army of labourers manually packing each aircraft. Containers will save a lot of manpower, ease the mass and balance work and hopefully make the process a lot faster.

Cant speak for FX, but at 5X they do a lot of building level stuff. So the sort in SDF will build a container of stuff all going to one building. There has to be a certain threshold, but chances are if you’re filling an ATR you have enough to justify it.

It works the same way for UPS in Köln as it does for FedEx in CDG. Everything goes in for sorting.

DiamondFlyer wrote:

jetblueguy22 wrote:

VSMUT wrote:

I can only speak for the European network, but in Paris everything gets sent to the hub for sorting and then gets repackee back into the containers, regardless of how it arrives. For the ATRs it also goes into containers that are then emptied onto the belt loader by the aircraft.

The big difference is that the ATRs are bulk loaded, meaning they have an army of labourers manually packing each aircraft. Containers will save a lot of manpower, ease the mass and balance work and hopefully make the process a lot faster.

Cant speak for FX, but at 5X they do a lot of building level stuff. So the sort in SDF will build a container of stuff all going to one building. There has to be a certain threshold, but chances are if you’re filling an ATR you have enough to justify it.

Exactly. The container gets filled in MEM, flies to FSD, then gets moved from the jet to an ATR to fly to RAP. Rather than having to unload it from the container in FSD, then bulk load it onto a smaller freighter. I'm surprised UPS hasn't gone this route as well, but maybe the costs at UPS would just be too high to make it happen.

Usually the volume just isn’t there.

Though the funny thing is I know of several buildings that have containers built for them for 2 Day volume but not for next day. It is far enough away from the airport that they need to quickly transfer it to a trailer and get it on the road off the day sort. But too far away for it to be serviced by air or not enough volume.

VSMUT wrote:

jetblueguy22 wrote:

VSMUT wrote:

I can only speak for the European network, but in Paris everything gets sent to the hub for sorting and then gets repackee back into the containers, regardless of how it arrives. For the ATRs it also goes into containers that are then emptied onto the belt loader by the aircraft.

The big difference is that the ATRs are bulk loaded, meaning they have an army of labourers manually packing each aircraft. Containers will save a lot of manpower, ease the mass and balance work and hopefully make the process a lot faster.

Cant speak for FX, but at 5X they do a lot of building level stuff. So the sort in SDF will build a container of stuff all going to one building. There has to be a certain threshold, but chances are if you’re filling an ATR you have enough to justify it.

It works the same way for UPS in Köln as it does for FedEx in CDG. Everything goes in for sorting.

I should have been more specific, I meant for the domestic/Canada/Caribbean pieces. CGN, while a big facility, doesn’t do the volume that generally makes building level bypass containers worthwhile. SDF is doing something like 10x the volume, heck of a lot easier to do.

Though I know they do get some bypass containers in CGN, but primarily it is overflow for flights to STN, CDG, DXB.

jetblueguy22 wrote:

Spacepope wrote:

MavyWavyATR wrote:

Wouldn't be surprised if Amazon takes a look at these if they want to access areas that are too small for their current 767's/737's.

Amazon uses their fleet to shuttle between their own centers, not final mile.

They will have no interest in something this small.

I’d argue that while you are correct now, but that is going to change as the new delivery stations coming online become more rural. They’re going to be a necessity if they ever decide to completely remove the USPS and UPS from their network. No way they let transit times decrease because they do it in house. The whole point was it allowed them to speed up delivery times.

Perhaps, however when going to smaller than a 737, Amazon would likely follow the same path o contracting an operatior to have cheap converted used aircraft rather than new build. Something like Berry and the E120 or possibly even up to CRJ2.

Spacepope wrote:

jetblueguy22 wrote:

Spacepope wrote:

Amazon uses their fleet to shuttle between their own centers, not final mile.

They will have no interest in something this small.

I’d argue that while you are correct now, but that is going to change as the new delivery stations coming online become more rural. They’re going to be a necessity if they ever decide to completely remove the USPS and UPS from their network. No way they let transit times decrease because they do it in house. The whole point was it allowed them to speed up delivery times.

Perhaps, however when going to smaller than a 737, Amazon would likely follow the same path o contracting an operatior to have cheap converted used aircraft rather than new build. Something like Berry and the E120 or possibly even up to CRJ2.

I'd think Ameriflight would be a better fit than Berry for Amazon. Either way, Amazon isn't going to go down that route, even though there is tons of 120's out there to convert.

In full FX livery.



https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ElgP7FgXEAA ... ame=medium

EI-GUL, the first of five for ASL


https://flyinginireland.com/2020/10/asl ... r-72-600f/

ATR today received EASA certification for new production ATR72 Freighter.



https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EoTggrlXYAE ... =4096x4096

jetblueguy22 wrote:

VSMUT wrote:

jetblueguy22 wrote:

Cant speak for FX, but at 5X they do a lot of building level stuff. So the sort in SDF will build a container of stuff all going to one building. There has to be a certain threshold, but chances are if you’re filling an ATR you have enough to justify it.

It works the same way for UPS in Köln as it does for FedEx in CDG. Everything goes in for sorting.

I should have been more specific, I meant for the domestic/Canada/Caribbean pieces. CGN, while a big facility, doesn’t do the volume that generally makes building level bypass containers worthwhile. SDF is doing something like 10x the volume, heck of a lot easier to do.

Though I know they do get some bypass containers in CGN, but primarily it is overflow for flights to STN, CDG, DXB.

Actually even in CDG you have a lot of connecting cans! I can’t remember accurate numbers here but around 2015 approx 20% of the overall volume never entered the sort building. And depending on the flight and day of the week, it wasn’t uncommon to have almost half of an aircraft load being « transloaded » straight to others. Of course feeder flights need to be fully sorted because of bulk load, but that’s where the -600 and it’s containerized deck could prove to be very valuable, allowing cans to connect directly to linehaul flights (I’m thinking MEM and CAN from CDG)

FedEx takes delivery on Tuesday of the first aircraft.

https://www.atr-aircraft.com/presspost/ ... freighter/

mercure1 wrote:

FedEx takes delivery on Tuesday of the first aircraft.

https://www.atr-aircraft.com/presspost/ ... freighter/

Beautiful aircraft.

Does anybody know the performance figures? Is it per ton more efficient than the 737F or A320F? I am guessing it depends quite a lot on stage length...

Sharp looking plane in FX livery.

December 15, 2020

To: Global Air Operations Team

I’m pleased to welcome the first ATR 72-600 regional freighter to the FedEx family. We took possession of this brand-new aircraft on Dec. 15, 2020 in Toulouse, France, and its enhanced capabilities are a game changer for our FedEx feeder fleet.

WHY THIS PLANE IS DIFFERENT

The ATR 72-600 is the first custom-built containerized feeder aircraft within our network, and it was constructed with input from FedEx engineers every step of the way. Current feeder aircraft do not carry containers or palletized freight. The new ATR 72-600 will allow us to better serve customers where palletized shipments are preferred, providing new strategic growth opportunities for FedEx.

Some specific features of this new aircraft are:

Large forward cargo door to hold LCDs
Rear upper hinged cargo door
Digital cockpit
Advanced avionics technology and enhanced takeoff performance
ADS-B “out” capabilities
Reinforced floor panels to support bulk cargo and unit load device (ULD) configurations.
In ULD mode, the 72-600 can accommodate up to seven ULD containers or five 88” x 108” pallets.

WHY THIS IS IMPORTANT

The addition of the ATR 72-600 is a significant step in our fleet modernization strategy, and it illustrates our continued commitment to reducing our cost to serve while providing new opportunities to reach customers around the world. FedEx originally announced the purchase agreement with ATR in November 2017. Under the agreement, FedEx Express made a firm purchase of 30 ATR 72-600F aircraft with options to purchase up to 20 more. This investment exemplifies our continued focus on strategic global growth, and I am very excited about the future of our airline and our business.

To hear more about how FedEx will benefit from the new ATR 72-600s, click here to watch a short video of a conversation I had with Kevin Burkhart, VP of Aircraft Acquisitions, and Bill West, VP of Supplemental Air Ops.

CLOSING

ASL Ireland will operate this new aircraft on behalf of FedEx Express. Once the plane passes regulatory requirements, it will begin transporting critical goods and services throughout Europe.

The ATR 72-600 delivery is the result of multi-year collaborative effort supported by many groups at FedEx Express. I want to thank teams from Aircraft Acquisition, Supplemental Air Ops Engineering, U.S. and Europe Feeder Operations, Ground Support Equipment Engineering, and the many other groups across FedEx that helped make this happen.

Thanks,

Scot Struminger
EVP & CEO, Aviation