Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
Aesma
Topic Author
Posts: 13163
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

A380 P2F needed now !

Sat Apr 11, 2020 4:27 pm

Imagine all the PPE you could ship !

Much more efficiently than the AN124 being used right now.
New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
 
Leej
Posts: 395
Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2001 10:39 pm

Re: A380 P2F needed now !

Sat Apr 11, 2020 4:32 pm

And by the time that is built and certified we'll be on Covid-20
 
Noshow
Posts: 1619
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 3:20 pm

Re: A380 P2F needed now !

Sat Apr 11, 2020 4:40 pm

Even if you take out the seats: The floor beams are not made for cargo. Especially on the early ones that got retired now. There is plenty of passenger twins available that can be used to cheaply carry belly cargo and some lighter stuff inside the cabin.
Last edited by Noshow on Sat Apr 11, 2020 4:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
Strato2
Posts: 552
Joined: Sat Sep 24, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: A380 P2F needed now !

Sat Apr 11, 2020 4:40 pm

Just let it be.
 
User avatar
SEPilot
Posts: 5631
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

Re: A380 P2F needed now !

Sat Apr 11, 2020 4:54 pm

Not going to happen. Not enough demand for a strictly package carrier that size and no existing infrastructure to support it.
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
 
TangoandCash
Posts: 47
Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2017 5:52 pm

Re: A380 P2F needed now !

Sat Apr 11, 2020 5:09 pm

A380 passenger-to-freighter conversions are going to be the next anet "Boeing should restart the 757 line", at least one new thread a week until the end of time.
 
User avatar
NWAROOSTER
Posts: 1336
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2005 2:29 pm

Re: A380 P2F needed now !

Sat Apr 11, 2020 5:12 pm

Aesma wrote:
Imagine all the PPE you could ship !

Much more efficiently than the AN124 being used right now.

You got to be kidding. The A380 was never designed to be a real freighter. It could only have side cargo doors of which the upper deck would have required a SPECIAL CARGO LOADER due to the height required to reach it. FedEx and UPS initially ordered them and ultimately cancelled their orders and that was one of the reasons. The AN 124 has both nose and tail methods to load and unload freight. The AN 124 is suitable for any loads along with the AN 125 which just started flying again. The Antonovs can haul just anything anywhere while while the A380 can haul tooth picks and would require special loaders and equipment which would relegate them to a very limited number of airports. The A380 when retired will be useable only as a source of parts, scrap material and to some idiot as a house if they can be moved to a suitable location. The A380 was Airbus's biggest blunder. They thought it would kill the Boeing 747-8i which only has about three operators as the 777 seems to be able to replace the 747. The few 747-8i built will be flying along with the 747-8F which will still be flying while the A380 s will be meeting the scrappers. The Boeing 767 and 777 and Airbus equivalent can more than handle the job!!!!!!!!! :old:
Procrastination Is The Theft Of Time.......
 
smokeybandit
Posts: 1383
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2014 3:24 pm

Re: A380 P2F needed now !

Sat Apr 11, 2020 5:14 pm

Leej wrote:
And by the time that is built and certified we'll be on Covid-20


Actually it'd be Covid-25, maybe even Covid-30.
 
Elementalism
Posts: 602
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 4:03 am

Re: A380 P2F needed now !

Sat Apr 11, 2020 5:14 pm

TangoandCash wrote:
A380 passenger-to-freighter conversions are going to be the next anet "Boeing should restart the 757 line", at least one new thread a week until the end of time.


The 757 restart threads will live long past the last flight of the 757 imo. Great plane!
 
User avatar
PatrickZ80
Posts: 4268
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 5:33 am

Re: A380 P2F needed now !

Sat Apr 11, 2020 5:30 pm

Aesma wrote:
Much more efficiently than the AN124 being used right now.


No it isn't.

When it comes to just volume, certainly. But air cargo is mostly weight, and the AN124 can support far more weight than the A380. Even the 747-8F, which is a smaller plane, can haul more cargo due to higher weight capacity. The A380 would have to fly mostly empty because the floor can't support more weight, while the 747 and AN-124 can be packed to the brim.

On top of that, both those aircraft have an extra cargo door at the front for faster loading and unloading. The A380 would have to rely on a single side door, it would take forever to load.

Now think again, which aircraft is more efficient?
 
raylee67
Posts: 890
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2011 11:06 pm

Re: A380 P2F needed now !

Sat Apr 11, 2020 6:17 pm

I think there are still many 747-400F or 747-400ERF that are sitting in the desert and can be brought back to service relatively quickly?
319/20/21 332/33 342/43/45 359/51 388 707 717 732/36/3G/38/39 74R/42/43/44/4E/48 757 762/63 772/7L/73/7W 788/89 D10 M80 135/40/45 175/90 DH1/4 CRJ/R7 L10
AY LH OU SR BA FI LX
AA DL UA NW AC CP WS FL NK PD
CI NH SQ KA CX JL BR OZ TG KE CA CZ NZ JQ RS
 
BMcD
Posts: 78
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2014 4:11 pm

Re: A380 P2F needed now !

Sat Apr 11, 2020 6:46 pm

Can do it on the same line as the AN-225 after being reengined and the 757NEO.

It makes no sense, cargo bulks out before it weights out. No sense in sending an A380, its a waste of lift for things like this. The 76X/77F are much better suited for the mission.
DC-8, DC-9, DC-10, MD-11, MD-80/2/3, 717, 737, 747, 757, 767, 777, 787, L1011, CRJ2/7/900, A320, A321, A330, Saab 340
 
asr0dzjq
Posts: 203
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2019 2:36 am

Re: A380 P2F needed now !

Sat Apr 11, 2020 7:05 pm

General Repostii
R.I.P. Douglas Aircraft Company
Born 22 July 1921 | Died 23 May 2006
You will be missed, but your management will not.
 
jeffrey0032j
Posts: 803
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 3:11 pm

Re: A380 P2F needed now !

Sat Apr 11, 2020 7:05 pm

raylee67 wrote:
I think there are still many 747-400F or 747-400ERF that are sitting in the desert and can be brought back to service relatively quickly?

Not that many Fs or ERFs available for sale or reactivation, Of the factory built 744Fs, around 5 (or less) have been scrapped, and the number stored is probably the same. Quite a testament to the 747F's capabilities for most of the frames to still be in service.

As for the converted 744s, they are not as desirable as they do not have a nose door for long objects, and can carry less payload than a factory built 744. They also tend to be older and tired as compared to the factory built frames, many converted 744s have been scrapped.
 
32andBelow
Posts: 4969
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 2:54 am

Re: A380 P2F needed now !

Sat Apr 11, 2020 7:59 pm

Aesma wrote:
Imagine all the PPE you could ship !

Much more efficiently than the AN124 being used right now.

You need an124 either. 777 or 747 or c17 is fine.
 
raylee67
Posts: 890
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2011 11:06 pm

Re: A380 P2F needed now !

Sat Apr 11, 2020 8:41 pm

jeffrey0032j wrote:
raylee67 wrote:
I think there are still many 747-400F or 747-400ERF that are sitting in the desert and can be brought back to service relatively quickly?

Not that many Fs or ERFs available for sale or reactivation, Of the factory built 744Fs, around 5 (or less) have been scrapped, and the number stored is probably the same. Quite a testament to the 747F's capabilities for most of the frames to still be in service.

As for the converted 744s, they are not as desirable as they do not have a nose door for long objects, and can carry less payload than a factory built 744. They also tend to be older and tired as compared to the factory built frames, many converted 744s have been scrapped.

But compare to trying to convert A380 for immediate need, I am sure those 744BCFs will be much more desirable? You don't need the nose door to load PPEs. A380P2F will not have nose door as well.

Also, didn't FedEx say just a few months ago it's parking 10% of its fleet this year, including many DC10 and MD11? I guess those are quite useful now?

Besides PPEs, the air cargo capacity is so constrained now that many postal services have suspended air mail and express mail. For example, you can't even send air mail from Hong Kong to Canada, US and Europe any more. We do need those parked freighters back to provide temporary additional air cargo flights.
319/20/21 332/33 342/43/45 359/51 388 707 717 732/36/3G/38/39 74R/42/43/44/4E/48 757 762/63 772/7L/73/7W 788/89 D10 M80 135/40/45 175/90 DH1/4 CRJ/R7 L10
AY LH OU SR BA FI LX
AA DL UA NW AC CP WS FL NK PD
CI NH SQ KA CX JL BR OZ TG KE CA CZ NZ JQ RS
 
CFRPwingALbody
Posts: 373
Joined: Thu Oct 19, 2017 8:13 pm

Re: A380 P2F needed now !

Sun Apr 12, 2020 12:32 pm

The largest hurdle for the A380 to survive are the structural deficiencies in the wings. The A380wings were designed for growth (A380F/ A380-900). To reduce weight thickness were reduced. In hindsight the reductions were a little to much, and a wrong type of aluminium has been used. That aluminium ages faster than tests predicted. This results in the requirement for frequent, thorough inspections of the wings.
AFAIK Airbus hasn't been able to develop an affordable permanent fix.
Indeed side cargo doors are the only option for P2F programs (only the 747 might be an exception.) An A380 would require a cargo door on both the main and upper deck, or an cargo elevator between the decks. I think an affordable P2combo conversion would utilize cargo elevators between the cargo hold and the main deck. This has hight restrictions for the cargo, but most likely the main deck doesn't require to be strengthened. An A380LCF.
I think 50 A380 will be scrapped, with the remaining <200 surviving for another two decades.
 
jetblueguy22
Posts: 3481
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 12:26 am

Re: A380 P2F needed now !

Sun Apr 12, 2020 11:01 pm

jeffrey0032j wrote:
raylee67 wrote:
I think there are still many 747-400F or 747-400ERF that are sitting in the desert and can be brought back to service relatively quickly?

Not that many Fs or ERFs available for sale or reactivation, Of the factory built 744Fs, around 5 (or less) have been scrapped, and the number stored is probably the same. Quite a testament to the 747F's capabilities for most of the frames to still be in service.

As for the converted 744s, they are not as desirable as they do not have a nose door for long objects, and can carry less payload than a factory built 744. They also tend to be older and tired as compared to the factory built frames, many converted 744s have been scrapped.

The nose door problem is so overblown on this site it isn’t even funny. Very little of the cargo that flies around the world needs nose loading.

Is it nice to have? Sure. But with the exception of some very specialized cargo it isn’t necessary.
Look at sweatpants guy. This is a 90 million dollar aircraft, not a Tallahassee strip club
 
jetblueguy22
Posts: 3481
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 12:26 am

Re: A380 P2F needed now !

Sun Apr 12, 2020 11:04 pm

The A380F would be a nightmare of epic proportions to load and unload. Not only would the two decks be a problem, but I’m positive you would have some kind of restriction on loading and unloading that would limit you to one deck at a time.

There would Need to be equipment specific to the aircraft that each airport would have to have. Not a big deal for stairs. But a big deal for deck loaders.

Between conversion, equipment, and complexity of unloading and loading, airlines are just going to take a pass, just like the pax airlines
Look at sweatpants guy. This is a 90 million dollar aircraft, not a Tallahassee strip club
 
jeffrey0032j
Posts: 803
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 3:11 pm

Re: A380 P2F needed now !

Mon Apr 13, 2020 1:24 am

jetblueguy22 wrote:
jeffrey0032j wrote:
raylee67 wrote:
I think there are still many 747-400F or 747-400ERF that are sitting in the desert and can be brought back to service relatively quickly?

Not that many Fs or ERFs available for sale or reactivation, Of the factory built 744Fs, around 5 (or less) have been scrapped, and the number stored is probably the same. Quite a testament to the 747F's capabilities for most of the frames to still be in service.

As for the converted 744s, they are not as desirable as they do not have a nose door for long objects, and can carry less payload than a factory built 744. They also tend to be older and tired as compared to the factory built frames, many converted 744s have been scrapped.

The nose door problem is so overblown on this site it isn’t even funny. Very little of the cargo that flies around the world needs nose loading.

Is it nice to have? Sure. But with the exception of some very specialized cargo it isn’t necessary.

But having 2 doors to load at the same time speeds up the whole process.
 
FGITD
Posts: 970
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 1:44 pm

Re: A380 P2F needed now !

Mon Apr 13, 2020 4:55 am

jeffrey0032j wrote:
jetblueguy22 wrote:
jeffrey0032j wrote:
Not that many Fs or ERFs available for sale or reactivation, Of the factory built 744Fs, around 5 (or less) have been scrapped, and the number stored is probably the same. Quite a testament to the 747F's capabilities for most of the frames to still be in service.

As for the converted 744s, they are not as desirable as they do not have a nose door for long objects, and can carry less payload than a factory built 744. They also tend to be older and tired as compared to the factory built frames, many converted 744s have been scrapped.

The nose door problem is so overblown on this site it isn’t even funny. Very little of the cargo that flies around the world needs nose loading.

Is it nice to have? Sure. But with the exception of some very specialized cargo it isn’t necessary.

But having 2 doors to load at the same time speeds up the whole process.


Give me a decent load team and you can still get it done quickly. I've also found the nose door to require more manpower and generally requires more labor and precision to load. Trust me, you'll never find a ramp handler overflowing with extra staffing. I'll take a 777F over all that stress any day! Requiring the nose door for things like turbine blades, masts, and so on is usually such a rare event that the carrier will invite a bunch of staff for the experience, and I've seen a few even make a VIP day of it. Team of Ukrainians and a 124 could probably move the same piece in half the time. The stories those guys can tell...

The 380F idea is just total nonsense. You either need an internal lift, which is a huge amount of weight and space, or loaders reaching the upper deck. And such a loader doesn't exist. (personally I also would not want to be on a loader at the 380 upper deck height on a windy night) Not to mention the new limits and regs that would come into play regarding contours, weight limits, loading order, wind limits, etc etc. All could be overcome, but not for any sufficient value.

Big does not necessarily equate to better for cargo

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 18 guests

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