A new cargo airliner on the XL cargo market: "Airbus Beluga Transport"

T4thH · Wed Jan 26, 2022 12:31 am

Till now was the big quesrion, what Airbus will do with the 5 A300-600 ST Beluga, after they have been replaced by the 6 new Airbus Beluga XL. The Beluga ST are already less flying and more and more parked.

Sell them? This was in discussion but no, not any more.
Scrap them? They are still young, they have just reached half of the cycles. So no.
Send one or two to America to fly between Montreal and Mobile; I really have hoped, but also no.

Airbus will form a new cargo airline , project name is till now "Airbus Beluga Transport". And they have already performed the first transport (in December, transport of one helicopter from France to Japan. Official start will be in 2023, they will start with the first two, F-GSTB and F-GSTC. 2025 all 5 A300-600 ST Beluga will fly for them

So we have a new player on the XL market, with only two players now, Volga Dnepr and Antonov airlines.

In German with additional information:
https://www.aerotelegraph.com/fuenf-belugas-airbus-gruendet-frachtairline-und-greift-antonov-airlines-an
Official Airbus press release:
https://www.airbus.com/en/newsroom/press-releases/2022-01-airbus-iconic-beluga-super-transporters-ready-to-serve-global

ZaphodHarkonnen · Wed Jan 26, 2022 12:36 am

The biggest problem to deal with that I see, and that they kinda touch on in the press release, is the specialist ground equipment needed to load and unload it.

If they can develop a deployable rail system that is carried internally then I can see this working. Otherwise you'd need to pre-position the loading equipment at each destination. Which is hardly a small or cheap task.

USAirKid · Wed Jan 26, 2022 12:47 am

ZaphodHarkonnen wrote:
The biggest problem to deal with that I see, and that they kinda touch on in the press release, is the specialist ground equipment needed to load and unload it.

If they can develop a deployable rail system that is carried internally then I can see this working. Otherwise you'd need to pre-position the loading equipment at each destination. Which is hardly a small or cheap task.

Looks like they have that in the pipeline:

To maximise the BelugaST’s turnaround capability for its targeted international customer base, new loading techniques and equipment are being developed for the operation. These solutions include an automated On-Board Cargo Loader (OBCL) for missions where a loading/unloading platform is not available at the origin or destination airport.

USAirKid · Wed Jan 26, 2022 12:50 am

What I’m fascinated by is that this will be an Airbus owned airline.

I know it’s old precedent, but Boeing was prohibited from owning an airline and was forced to spin off United many years ago. Boeing seemed to have continued this, as they have Atlas operate the 747LCF for them.

I wonder if Airbus will be forced to sell their new airline?

32andBelow · Wed Jan 26, 2022 1:05 am

ZaphodHarkonnen wrote:
The biggest problem to deal with that I see, and that they kinda touch on in the press release, is the specialist ground equipment needed to load and unload it.

If they can develop a deployable rail system that is carried internally then I can see this working. Otherwise you'd need to pre-position the loading equipment at each destination. Which is hardly a small or cheap task.

The antonovs bring their own ground crews and equipment

WayexTDI · Wed Jan 26, 2022 1:08 am

USAirKid wrote:
What I’m fascinated by is that this will be an Airbus owned airline.

I know it’s old precedent, but Boeing was prohibited from owning an airline and was forced to spin off United many years ago. Boeing seemed to have continued this, as they have Atlas operate the 747LCF for them.

I wonder if Airbus will be forced to sell their new airline?

The Airbus cargo airline will not be headquartered in the US; so, this ruling would not apply. Antonov Airlines is an existing example of an aircraft manufacturer owing a cargo airline using extra-specialized cargo planes.

LDRA · Wed Jan 26, 2022 1:16 am

Are these blimpy airplanes even EASA certified? How does Airbus operate them commercially?

WayexTDI · Wed Jan 26, 2022 2:02 am

LDRA wrote:
Are these blimpy airplanes even EASA certified? How does Airbus operate them commercially?

Yup, EASA TCDS EASA.A.014 (https://www.easa.europa.eu/sites/defaul ... 052010.pdf)

hongkongflyer · Wed Jan 26, 2022 2:13 am

Isn't the certificate of Beluga restricted it to be used by Airbus only and not for commercial purposes?

mjoelnir · Wed Jan 26, 2022 3:02 am

The Beluga are now operated by Airbus Transport International, an internal Airbus airline.
Before they got to busy in the last years, they did transports for different customers.
I remember a flight with a helicopter to Australia and oversized paintings from Paris to New York.
They have units to climatize the hold even though it is unpressurized.
They now pick up where they left of.
They seem to have decided to separate the commercial flying for customers from their internal airline.

As Airbus has already flown the Beluga international in the past, I assume they have all the necessary certifications and permissions.
AFAIK they can not sell the Beluga, but have to fly them themselves.

GalaxyFlyer · Wed Jan 26, 2022 3:27 am

USAirKid wrote:
What I’m fascinated by is that this will be an Airbus owned airline.

I know it’s old precedent, but Boeing was prohibited from owning an airline and was forced to spin off United many years ago. Boeing seemed to have continued this, as they have Atlas operate the 747LCF for them.

I wonder if Airbus will be forced to sell their new airline?

Time flies, it was only 87 years ago that the USG forced United Air Transport, a holding company owned by Boeing and P&W, to divest the airline side of the company. Boeing, in modern times, could operate the Dreamlifters on their own account, just easier to have Atlas fly them.

Francoflier · Wed Jan 26, 2022 3:36 am

For clarity, they will create a new subsidiary airline, with its own AOC, to operate them:

In the near future, once Airbus has commissioned all six new BelugaXLs, the fully-released BelugaST fleet will be handed over to a newly-created, subsidiary airline with its own Air Operator Certificate (AOC) and staff. Philippe Sabo added: “The new airline will be flexible and agile to address the needs of external worldwide markets.”

It will be separate from whatever internal entity operates the XLs on the Airbus milk runs.

zkojq · Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:16 am

This further reduces the demand for 747s for outsize cargo work that requires the Nose Cargo Door.

I was wondering what potential there was to sub A330BelugaXL with A300STs and vice versa, but if they're on different AOCs that gets tricky.

flee · Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:35 am

I think Airbus is right to make the Beluga airline a separate profit centre - this will allow for accountability and it will also allow shareholders to determine if this kind of airline can be viable.

ZaphodHarkonnen · Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:38 am

USAirKid wrote:
ZaphodHarkonnen wrote:
The biggest problem to deal with that I see, and that they kinda touch on in the press release, is the specialist ground equipment needed to load and unload it.

If they can develop a deployable rail system that is carried internally then I can see this working. Otherwise you'd need to pre-position the loading equipment at each destination. Which is hardly a small or cheap task.

Looks like they have that in the pipeline:
To maximise the BelugaST’s turnaround capability for its targeted international customer base, new loading techniques and equipment are being developed for the operation. These solutions include an automated On-Board Cargo Loader (OBCL) for missions where a loading/unloading platform is not available at the origin or destination airport.

That would be the bit I mentioned.

But yeah, if they can make that bit work then yeah, should be workable for many outsize loads.

Spacepope · Wed Jan 26, 2022 5:11 am

zkojq wrote:
This further reduces the demand for 747s for outsize cargo work that requires the Nose Cargo Door.

I was wondering what potential there was to sub A330BelugaXL with A300STs and vice versa, but if they're on different AOCs that gets tricky.

In that respect it’s spitting in the ocean. There are so many more 744Fs out there than Belugas, with different but usually greater capabilities.

I feel it’s more like a company charters Airbus because they simply have no other options.

Doesn’t mean Airbus won’t make money off of it though, they can charge whatever they want for that service.

ojjunior · Wed Jan 26, 2022 5:38 am

Silly question: Is any certified A300 pilot allowed to fly the Beluga?

tommy1808 · Wed Jan 26, 2022 5:39 am

WayexTDI wrote:
LDRA wrote:
Are these blimpy airplanes even EASA certified? How does Airbus operate them commercially?

Yup, EASA TCDS EASA.A.014 (https://www.easa.europa.eu/sites/defaul ... 052010.pdf)

I seem to recall that Airbus tried to find commercial operators for the Beluga back when they developed it, but just could not find any takers.

best regards
Thomas

JerseyFlyer · Wed Jan 26, 2022 7:17 am

I guess potential customers are those that currently look to Antonovs

Duke91 · Wed Jan 26, 2022 7:24 am

USAirKid wrote:
What I’m fascinated by is that this will be an Airbus owned airline.

I know it’s old precedent, but Boeing was prohibited from owning an airline and was forced to spin off United many years ago. Boeing seemed to have continued this, as they have Atlas operate the 747LCF for them.

I wonder if Airbus will be forced to sell their new airline?

They also have their own Airbus bank. What comes next?

I also wonder what kind of freight would choose to be transported with the Beluga?

I think this airliner would just be used for flexibility purposes, in case the new Beluga XL are not enough for some production spikes.

zeke · Wed Jan 26, 2022 8:10 am

hongkongflyer wrote:
Isn't the certificate of Beluga restricted it to be used by Airbus only and not for commercial purposes?

No, they have done commercial charters before. I remember them using them to move artwork around, also numerous space vehicles.

rigo · Wed Jan 26, 2022 9:37 am

Duke91 wrote:
I also wonder what kind of freight would choose to be transported with the Beluga?

See https://www.airbus.com/en/newsroom/stories/2022-01-airbus-deploys-beluga-a300-600-st-fleet-to-serve-industrys-outsized-cargo

For example Airbus used a Beluga to deliver a helicopter to a customer in Japan. Thanks to the Beluga it was not necessary to disassemble the helicopter, the Beluga could swallow it whole.

Noshow · Wed Jan 26, 2022 9:52 am

How about Boeing? With Dreamliner production limited to Charleston only, they should have unused Dreamlifter capacity planned for the Everett assembly site sitting idle now?

mjoelnir · Wed Jan 26, 2022 10:25 am

Noshow wrote:
How about Boeing? With Dreamliner production limited to Charleston only, they should have unused Dreamlifter capacity planned for the Everett assembly site sitting idle now?

The Dreamlifter has a more limited certification than the Beluga.

AFAIK Airbus is working on a full certification for the Beluga XL.

5427247845 · Wed Jan 26, 2022 10:34 am

Duke91 wrote:

I also wonder what kind of freight would choose to be transported with the Beluga?

What about WB aircraft engines?

zeke · Wed Jan 26, 2022 10:35 am

Noshow wrote:
How about Boeing? With Dreamliner production limited to Charleston only, they should have unused Dreamlifter capacity planned for the Everett assembly site sitting idle now?

It’s restricted to Boeing related activities

mjoelnir wrote:
AFAIK Airbus is working on a full certification for the Beluga XL.

It’s already certified, formally the A330-700

mjoelnir · Wed Jan 26, 2022 10:58 am

marcelh wrote:
Duke91 wrote:

I also wonder what kind of freight would choose to be transported with the Beluga?

What about WB aircraft engines?

The biggest available engines fully assembled.

Noshow · Wed Jan 26, 2022 11:25 am

Would the A400M make any sense in this business? Big cargo compartment and big range. Wasn't it even civil certified? Airbus could build some cheap ones on idle production slots. I was just wondering about the humanitarian cargo part of demand mentioned by Airbus.

frmrCapCadet · Wed Jan 26, 2022 3:39 pm

There is a need world wide for specialty equipment flights. A comparatively small but important niche. This is the sort of thing even us non-spotters might do a day trip to see it land in a nearby airport.

JerseyFlyer · Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:31 pm

Comparison to AN 124:

"It has a larger cross-section than the AN-124, a tad longer freight compartment, and loads outsized but less heavy cargo."

https://leehamnews.com/2022/01/25/airbu ... go-market/

bikerthai · Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:45 pm

mjoelnir wrote:
Dreamlifter has a more limited certification than the Beluga.

True.

zeke wrote:
It’s restricted to Boeing related activities

With caveat. They did get approval for transporting PPE from China to the US at the start of the pandemic, but in the lower cargo hold.

Not sure if it's a limited approval or that the dreamlifter can transport every day cargo in the lower lobe.

bt

zeke · Wed Jan 26, 2022 5:36 pm

bikerthai wrote:

Not sure if it's a limited approval or that the dreamlifter can transport every day cargo in the lower lobe.

bt

The TCDS says the lower hold is decommissioned and no cargo to be carried

“These airplanes are not approved for commercial freight hauling operations of material other than that approved per Exemptions 8769 and 8769A. Only cargo that supports Boeing corporate lines of business is allowed for carriage. The lower lobe cargo compartments are decommissioned and may not be used to carry cargo. All items intended for carriage must conform to the standards found in Document D926U013-44, “747-400 LCF Flammability Acceptance Criteria for Cargo Carriage,” or be accepted by the FAA once a safe method of transport has been established. A summary of all items allowed for carriage is identified in Document D451U742-01, “Allowable Cargo – 747-400 Large Cargo Freighter.” Document D451U742-01 is considered part of the Weight and Balance Manual/Airplane Flight Manual. In addition, a listing of the FAA-approved shipping mechanical equipment (SME) fixtures that are approved for installation on the 747- 400 LCF aircraft are contained in the Weight and Balance Control and Loading Manual (Document D043U545-BHC1).”

From 747 TCDS A20WE

FSflyer899 · Wed Jan 26, 2022 7:50 pm

They have an ad out about it. And it seems they have the cargo loader with it, so don't need any special/additional loading equipment at the destination?

https://youtu.be/vES4M8lzTCE

zeke · Wed Jan 26, 2022 8:10 pm

FSflyer899 wrote:
They have an ad out about it. And it seems they have the cargo loader with it, so don't need any special/additional loading equipment at the destination?

https://youtu.be/vES4M8lzTCE

The automated On-Board Cargo Loader (OBCL) is under development.

ZaphodHarkonnen · Wed Jan 26, 2022 8:53 pm

mjoelnir wrote:
marcelh wrote:
Duke91 wrote:

I also wonder what kind of freight would choose to be transported with the Beluga?

What about WB aircraft engines?

The biggest available engines fully assembled.

The GE90 needs to be split in two for shipping in freighters. The fan has to be removed from the rest of the unit. The Beluga will be able to carry such things not only fully assembled but even fitted ready for immediate installation. This is the sort of feature that they could contract out to engine manufacturers for short notice shipping to stranded aircraft that are not within land shipping distance to replacement engines. Especially with so much power by the hour.

Revelation · Wed Jan 26, 2022 9:24 pm

Can anyone explain why they need to seperate the GE90 fan and power unit when using the Antonov, but won't need to do so for the Beluga? We have pictures in our DB showing it fits front/back no problem.

889091 · Wed Jan 26, 2022 9:29 pm

Revelation wrote:
Can anyone explain why they need to seperate the GE90 fan and power unit when using the Antonov, but won't need to do so for the Beluga? We have pictures in our DB showing it fits front/back no problem.

Wow! Do they spit polish the floors? Looks real clean!

IADCA · Wed Jan 26, 2022 9:35 pm

USAirKid wrote:
What I’m fascinated by is that this will be an Airbus owned airline.

I know it’s old precedent, but Boeing was prohibited from owning an airline and was forced to spin off United many years ago. Boeing seemed to have continued this, as they have Atlas operate the 747LCF for them.

I wonder if Airbus will be forced to sell their new airline?

The actual US law that had this effect - the Black-McKellar Act (sometimes known as the Air Mail Act of 1934) doesn't prevent a manufacturer from owning an airline. It just prevents a person or entity involved in both from having an airmail contract. That mattered a lot more in the past than today, because airlines used to be commercially non-viable without airmail contracts.

hongkongflyer · Thu Jan 27, 2022 2:57 am

Revelation wrote:
Can anyone explain why they need to seperate the GE90 fan and power unit when using the Antonov, but won't need to do so for the Beluga? We have pictures in our DB showing it fits front/back no problem.

May be the front cargo door clearance (due to the slope) is not as large as Beluga's.

NameOmitted · Thu Jan 27, 2022 4:03 am

zeke wrote:
hongkongflyer wrote:
Isn't the certificate of Beluga restricted it to be used by Airbus only and not for commercial purposes?

No, they have done commercial charters before. I remember them using them to move artwork around, also numerous space vehicles.

If I recall correctly, Airbus needs too many of the aircraft for in-house use to have been able to keep the fleet down to an "experimental" fleet, so had to go the full way to get it certified.

Boeing can do more of its work by rail.

speedygonzales · Thu Jan 27, 2022 9:18 am

mjoelnir wrote:
Noshow wrote:
How about Boeing? With Dreamliner production limited to Charleston only, they should have unused Dreamlifter capacity planned for the Everett assembly site sitting idle now?

The Dreamlifter has a more limited certification than the Beluga.

AFAIK Airbus is working on a full certification for the Beluga XL.

Even ignoring the certification issue, the 747 LCF is far more limited due to the inability to open the swing tail without a custom ground support vehicle.

Revelation · Thu Jan 27, 2022 3:04 pm

hongkongflyer wrote:
May be the front cargo door clearance (due to the slope) is not as large as Beluga's.

I don't know (which is why I asked), but we have photos of them loading Atlas rocket segments onto the AN-124:

Ref: https://blog.ulalaunch.com/blog/mars-20 ... aunch-site

I'm pretty sure those ramps travel with the aircraft based on a documentary I once saw. Also, the under-carriage "kneels" to lower the angle.

https://samchui.com/2020/02/18/flying-v ... ansporter/ shows the kneeling and the unloading of ramps, although those appear to be different ramps.

I suspect the AN-124 could take one (or more) GE-90 in one piece instead of two, but I suspect the shipping procedures presumed it was in two sections and the stands were built to travel separately, but this is just my guess.

The point is, IMO, that the Beluga will have to deal with some existing competition, it appears to me. It will be interesting to see if Beluga ends up displacing the competition or not. I'm sure there are plusses and minuses for each.

Revelation · Thu Jan 27, 2022 3:19 pm

NameOmitted wrote:
Boeing can do more of its work by rail.

I think both do more work than most people suspect by sea. For instance above in this thread it was thought the A300 Belugas would be used to transfer A320 sections to the FAL in Alabama, but nope, these go by sea.

One day I was bored and did some research ( viewtopic.php?t=1442009#p22050615 ) which dug up this picture from Airbus itself:

Ref: https://www.airbus.com/aircraft/how-is- ... tions.html

Boeing uses sea transport a lot. There was/is a special railroad spur from the Port of Everett to the plant at KPAE ( ref: viewtopic.php?t=1461929#p22841911 ) that handles odd-shaped airplane parts:

Ref: https://trainsnscale.com/models-and-pro ... s-by-rail/

bikerthai · Thu Jan 27, 2022 3:49 pm

We get our hardware (large cabinet size) shipped by air from India due to scheduling. But there is attempt to switch over to shipping by sea as the cost is an order of magnitude lower (which easily overcome inventory cost during transit).

So you have to build in extra flow time and understand that air route is still needed for quick reaction to new design or design changes.

bt

YYZYYT · Thu Jan 27, 2022 4:41 pm

zkojq wrote:
This further reduces the demand for 747s for outsize cargo work that requires the Nose Cargo Door.

I was wondering what potential there was to sub A330BelugaXL with A300STs and vice versa, but if they're on different AOCs that gets tricky.

I'm guessing that Airbus-owned aircraft couldn't be subbed for a commercial operator, but there is no reason Airbus couldn't charter the 300's when needed. It's an elegant solution - the old aircraft are available as extra lift if ever needed, but they are self-funding and maybe can even turn a profit to send back to Airbus.

ZaphodHarkonnen · Thu Jan 27, 2022 6:35 pm

Revelation wrote:
Can anyone explain why they need to seperate the GE90 fan and power unit when using the Antonov, but won't need to do so for the Beluga? We have pictures in our DB showing it fits front/back no problem.

My understanding is that GE90s are generally moved via standard air freight. Not the specialised outsize operations like Antonov. For airframes like the B777F you need to split the fan and power units.

Revelation · Thu Jan 27, 2022 7:10 pm

ZaphodHarkonnen wrote:
My understanding is that GE90s are generally moved via standard air freight. Not the specialised outsize operations like Antonov. For airframes like the B777F you need to split the fan and power units.

Which suggests the market for moving jet engines also will not be generally available to Beluga.

oldJoe · Thu Jan 27, 2022 7:24 pm

YYZYYT wrote:
zkojq wrote:
This further reduces the demand for 747s for outsize cargo work that requires the Nose Cargo Door.

I was wondering what potential there was to sub A330BelugaXL with A300STs and vice versa, but if they're on different AOCs that gets tricky.

I'm guessing that Airbus-owned aircraft couldn't be subbed for a commercial operator, but there is no reason Airbus couldn't charter the 300's when needed. It's an elegant solution - the old aircraft are available as extra lift if ever needed, but they are self-funding and maybe can even turn a profit to send back to Airbus.

Who starts this operation ? Airbus Transport International ( ATI ) and only next year ( 2023 ) they create a new airline.

https://simpleflying.com/airbus-beluga-freight-charter-airline/

from the article :

“we agreed with ATI to have access to one BelugaXL for extra-long flights from next year.”

This will be done on an ad-hoc basis

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net