Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
G500
Topic Author
Posts: 1269
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2011 11:45 pm

Less Cargo Planes, More Cargo On Airliners

Tue Jul 08, 2014 5:50 pm

excellent read, looks like the airlines' double-dipping of passengers + cargo is delivering handsome rewards


"For the world’s biggest maker of air freighters, the most formidable competition is coming from the bellies of its own passenger planes. Sales of cargo versions of Boeing’s 777 and 747-8 aircraft have stalled as British Airways, Delta Air Lines, FedEx, operator of the world’s largest cargo airline, and other carriers ground older cargo planes and transfer freight to Boeing’s widebody 777 passenger jets. The shift is forcing Boeing to rethink its cargo business as a glut of large passenger jets hits the market over the next two years.

“I haven’t sold a widebody freighter in four years,” says Glen Langdon, president of Langdon Asset Management, a San Francisco company that sells used 747s and other large commercial jets. “I was stunned and amazed by just how much capacity there is below deck,” Langdon says of the newer 777 passenger jet, which can carry 7,120 cubic feet of freight—25 percent more than Boeing’s 747 passenger jumbo—and as many as 386 people. The 747-8 and 777 are among Boeing’s priciest models, listing for $357.5 million and $300.5 million, respectively.

Air freight transports goods that account for about 35 percent of the total value of global trade, everything from semiconductors to iPads to this year’s beaujolais nouveau. Demand has been slow to return since the economic crisis. Tepid growth during the recession, especially in the U.S. and Europe, meant that shipments moved to cheaper and slower modes of transportation. Still, air freight accounted for about $60 billion in sales in 2013, roughly one-tenth as much as global passenger airline revenue"



full article
http://www.businessweek.com/articles...es-lose-to-boeing-passenger-planes
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 27050
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Less Cargo Planes, More Cargo On Airliners

Tue Jul 08, 2014 6:13 pm

The 777-300ER and A350-1000 offer almost 40% more LD3 positions than a 747-400 with similar payload weight and better range.

The 787-8 and A350-800 offer two more LD3 positions than the A330-200 and the 787-9 and A350-900 offer four more LD3 positions than the A330-300, A340-300 and 777-200.

In terms of dedicated freighter aircraft, the 777F can lift around 85% of the volume and 95% of the weight of the 747-400 with significantly better efficiency and the (eventual) 777-8F will close the volume gap even more. As such, I see both still playing a role going forward.

The future for the 747-8F is a bit murkier. While it offers some 18% more payload weight lift, it only offers about 7% more payload volume than the 747-400F. So if your an operator who tends to reach volumetric payload limits before weight payload limits, the 777F / 778F might be the better option.

[Edited 2014-07-08 11:22:04]
 
migair54
Posts: 2437
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2007 4:24 am

RE: Less Cargo Planes, More Cargo On Airliners

Tue Jul 08, 2014 7:32 pm

The other day I wanted to start a thread about this, the new planes are killing the full cargo airlines with the belly cargo, I know the full cargo are necessary because some cargo can´t be transported in pax planes and some is too big for them too, but slowly all the airlines that used to operate cargo planes are getting rid of them, last example is KLM trying to sell Martinair.

In the last years we have seen a reduce in cargo fleets and some airlines closing, however I don´t think the cargo uplift has been reduced actually I think it is getting bigger.

The B77W has been the greatest example of the new generation planes, many airlines has found on it a gold mine, airlines like EK, QR, CX, AF, now also EvaAir is joining the group.

And it´s not only this, but all of this B77W will in a few years make a perfect planes for this airlines like FedEx, DHL, UPS to start replacing Md11, DC10, B747.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 1):
The 777-300ER and A350-1000 offer almost 40% more LD3 positions than a 747-400 with similar payload weight and better range.

Better range, cheaper operational cost, cheaper maintenance, lower fuel burn, only in hot and high airports is where they can´t compete with the B747, but even this is closing the gap fast.

No doubt that Airbus and boieng really hit the nail with both models B777 (W and 9) and A350.
 
Prost
Posts: 2560
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 6:23 pm

RE: Less Cargo Planes, More Cargo On Airliners

Tue Jul 08, 2014 7:40 pm

I'd like to see a comparison of a KLM 747-400 combi versus a 777-300ER, ie. which provides better revenue/lower costs to the bottomline. I'm guessing from this article, the 773 wins, but I'd like to seesome numbers.
 
User avatar
sunrisevalley
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

RE: Less Cargo Planes, More Cargo On Airliners

Tue Jul 08, 2014 8:12 pm

You are touching on one of my favorite topics, the revenue enhancement abiltity of the big new twins with their cavernous bellies.
I am going to use the 789 as an example because with the help of Piano-X it is possible to get real close to what the potential is.
The 789 with 280 passengers and allowing for their baggage has available ~112 m^3 of space. Typical density for airliner belly cargo is ~ 160 kg m^3 which plus tare allows for ~ 18t

A 789 with passenger load only for a 6000nm sector will burn ~64.5t of fuel. Add 18t of cargo and the burn goes to 71.5t . This burn increase at current fuel prices of ~$980 mt calculates through at ~38cents/ kg There is little or no additional incremental costs except the costs associated with taking off and landing with heavier loads. Aspire had a good article on CX and the gross margin they are achieving on their belly cargo operations . It is pretty impressive. Typically they are running their 77W's at ~212t ZFW HKG-JFK-HKG. Assuming ~ 85% passenger load factor they are probably hauling ~15t of cargo per sector. I believe NH gets some pretty good cargo loads on their 77W's' especially since their seat counts are quite low.
 
pnwtraveler
Posts: 1074
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2007 2:12 am

RE: Less Cargo Planes, More Cargo On Airliners

Tue Jul 08, 2014 8:15 pm

This is the very reason AC converted their 77F order into other aircraft. That was also reinforced by the softening of the cargo market. Once the 77LR and 77W aircraft started service they were amazed that the aircraft carried even more cargo than they had anticipated. They were able to stop wet leases of MD11F and DC10F aircraft. It really marked the end of AC Cargo having their own aircraft, at least in the foreseeable future. With the second tranche of 77W's and now 788 and 789 later the additional cargo room in all these bellies of aircraft will add up.
 
INFINITI329
Posts: 2516
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2012 12:53 am

RE: Less Cargo Planes, More Cargo On Airliners

Tue Jul 08, 2014 8:16 pm

I know AC can attest this. When AC made their orders for 777s it included both pax and freight versions. But once AC recived their their pax 777 they were astonished by the cargo capability given to them. The promptly cancelled or converted (not sure which one) their 777F orders.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 27050
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Less Cargo Planes, More Cargo On Airliners

Tue Jul 08, 2014 8:33 pm

Quoting Prost (Reply 3):
I'd like to see a comparison of a KLM 747-400 combi versus a 777-300ER, ie. which provides better revenue/lower costs to the bottomline. I'm guessing from this article, the 773 wins, but I'd like to seesome numbers.

Assuming a full passenger load (268 passengers) with two bags per passenger, the 747-400M would use all 8 LD2 / 16 LD3 positions in the front cargo bay for passenger bags (assuming 70 bags per LD2 / 35 bags per LD3, which is the lower end of what I have heard they can fit).

This would allow for five 96x125" pallets in the aft bay, plus seven more pallets on the main deck for a total of twelve pallets.

Assuming a full passenger load (425 passengers) with two bags per passenger, the 777-300ER would use all 24 LD3 positions in the forward cargo bay for passenger bags, leaving the aft bay for six 96x125" pallets.



Quoting infiniti329 (Reply 6):
The promptly cancelled or converted (not sure which one) their 777F orders.

They technically cancelled and then converted.  Smile

When the pilots (ACPA) rejected the contract in June of 2005, AC cancelled their 777 and 787 orders. When ACPA later approved the pact, AC re-ordered the frames, but converted the two 777Fs to passenger models.

[Edited 2014-07-08 13:38:11]
 
b747400erf
Posts: 3135
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2013 4:33 am

RE: Less Cargo Planes, More Cargo On Airliners

Tue Jul 08, 2014 8:37 pm

The factory 747F has an added bonus of a front cargo door for oddly sized freight, something an operator like Cathay I am sure appreciates. It also cuts down on the loading and unloading time for faster turns. There will always be a market for 747F's, and I believe in the next few years when the market recovers a bit and if gas prices are not higher, the 747-8F will start to sell better. It already makes up the majority of the fleet for many big cargo operators like Cathay, Nippon and Cargolux.
 
CALMSP
Posts: 3173
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2003 3:18 am

RE: Less Cargo Planes, More Cargo On Airliners

Tue Jul 08, 2014 8:38 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 7):

a good planning for bags in ULD's are 30 bags for LD2 / 40 for LD3 / 60 for LD8
 
INFINITI329
Posts: 2516
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2012 12:53 am

RE: Less Cargo Planes, More Cargo On Airliners

Tue Jul 08, 2014 8:43 pm

Quoting pnwtraveler (Reply 5):
pnwtraveler

We pointed out the same point a minute apart... great minds
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 6593
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

RE: Less Cargo Planes, More Cargo On Airliners

Tue Jul 08, 2014 8:44 pm

Quoting sunrisevalley (Reply 4):
Typically they are running their 77W's at ~212t ZFW HKG-JFK-HKG. Assuming ~ 85% passenger load factor they are probably hauling ~15t of cargo per sector.

That is just flat impressive no matter how you look at it, on one of the most demanding sectors operated today. It's no wonder all of the big Asian airlines have stumbled over each other to get 77Ws into the fleet as quickly as possible.
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Posts: 26968
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

RE: Less Cargo Planes, More Cargo On Airliners

Tue Jul 08, 2014 8:59 pm

There's another article on Aviationweek:

Quote:
While cargo operators are parking fuel-hungry Boeing 747s and MD-11s, passenger operators are loading up the belly holds of their new widebody aircraft. As the International Air Transport Association notes, despite a slight increase in airfreight demand, continued increases in capacity across passenger aircraft have restricted the freighter loads factor, which remains at a low 46%. The Boeing 777ER, for example, can stow 30 tons of cargo in its hold with a full passenger load, the Airbus A350-900 has capacity for 25 tons and the -1000 version, 33 tons. The Boeing 787 can carry 18 tons.

With a 20% increase in the rate of widebody deliveries this year, this -dramatic expansion of belly cargo capacity will pose a significant threat to dedicated -freighter-only operators. Although the downside to passenger-carried freight is that turnaround times can be compromised—and landing and handling fees correspondingly increased—the upside is that cargo integrators such as DHL, FedEx and UPS rent whatever cargo space they can find on any available aircraft in addition to loading up their own dedicated freight fleets. The integrators’ sophisticated logistics solutions (including warehousing and systems) mean they can offer a complete package that many air cargo specialists do not, which is especially attractive to high-value, low-volume goods shippers.

The signs are there: Evergreen International, Atlas Air and Southern Air have all recently declared bankruptcy; Japan Airlines abandoned freighter cargo completely in 2010. Meanwhile, Cathay Pacific Airways says it flies 170-220 tons of belly cargo on average every day between Hong Kong and Singapore. And low-cost carrier AirAsia racked up a cargo growth rate of 33% in the fourth quarter of 2013 carrying 10,000 tons of belly cargo.
What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
 
migair54
Posts: 2437
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2007 4:24 am

RE: Less Cargo Planes, More Cargo On Airliners

Tue Jul 08, 2014 9:03 pm

Quoting pnwtraveler (Reply 5):
This is the very reason AC converted their 77F order into other aircraft

i didn´t know this, but AF is also reducing the cargo operations because with such a big B77W fleet they don´t need the full cargo planes any longer, and KLM same with Martinair, even SQ has reduce the cargo quite a bit.

Quoting Prost (Reply 3):
I'd like to see a comparison of a KLM 747-400 combi versus a 777-300ER, ie. which provides better revenue/lower costs to the bottomline. I'm guessing from this article, the 773 wins, but I'd like to seesome numbers.

I don´t think the combi plane is doing even close to the B77W, who operate them??, but it´s true that we would appreciate real numbers. Also KLM doesn´t really use the best configuration to have a big cargo uplift, they carry 425 pax in the B77W, and for example ANZ has around 330, EK around 340, NH has around 225 to 300, CX 275 & 340. so we are talking abound more than 75 pax, that´s quite a few tons less for cargo.

Quoting sunrisevalley (Reply 4):
A 789 with passenger load only for a 6000nm sector will burn ~64.5t of fuel. Add 18t of cargo and the burn goes to 71.5t . This burn increase at current fuel prices of ~$980 mt calculates through at ~38cents/ kg There is little or no additional incremental costs except the costs associated with taking off and landing with heavier loads. Aspire had a good article on CX and the gross margin they are achieving on their belly cargo operations . It is pretty impressive. Typically they are running their 77W's at ~212t ZFW HKG-JFK-HKG. Assuming ~ 85% passenger load factor they are probably hauling ~15t of cargo per sector. I believe NH gets some pretty good cargo loads on their 77W's' especially since their seat counts are quite low.

Do you have a link to the article?? CX performance in NYC is quite impressive by the way.
 
lhcvg
Posts: 1255
Joined: Mon May 25, 2009 2:53 pm

RE: Less Cargo Planes, More Cargo On Airliners

Tue Jul 08, 2014 9:14 pm

Quoting B747400ERF (Reply 8):

I think that's the key differentiator that keeps the 747F and Antonov's alive -- there IS still a market for outsize cargo that only these birds can carry. When you need the space (such as for transporting a GE90-115B with the front fan attached), nothing else will do. But for maybe 98% of the world's cargo, LD3s in the belly work just fine (1% for the bulk stuff, and then MAYBE another 1% for when you have enough volume to make stuffing a whole 747 with laptops or clothes from Asia to NA a better deal).
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Posts: 26968
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

RE: Less Cargo Planes, More Cargo On Airliners

Tue Jul 08, 2014 9:32 pm

Quoting migair54 (Reply 2):
The other day I wanted to start a thread about this, the new planes are killing the full cargo airlines with the belly cargo, I know the full cargo are necessary because some cargo can´t be transported in pax planes and some is too big for them too, but slowly all the airlines that used to operate cargo planes are getting rid of them, last example is KLM trying to sell Martinair.

While true, there will always be a need for dedicated freighter models like the 777F and 747F. And thanks to the financial crisis and the weak cargo market, many small cargo operators with fuel inefficient freighters are now gone (Jade Cargo comes to mind) so that should stabilize the cargo market a bit. And the big cargo operators like CX can and will buy brand-new freighters like the 747-8F.

Quoting B747400ERF (Reply 8):
The factory 747F has an added bonus of a front cargo door for oddly sized freight, something an operator like Cathay I am sure appreciates.

That may be true, the question is how many Boeing can sell to keep the line open.
What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
 
Viscount724
Posts: 19316
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:32 pm

RE: Less Cargo Planes, More Cargo On Airliners

Wed Jul 09, 2014 1:45 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 1):
The 777-300ER and A350-1000 offer almost 40% more LD3 positions than a 747-400 with similar payload weight and better range.

Where did you find the 40% number? Boeing shows total lower deck volume of the 77W and 744 as follows (including bulk compartments):

77W - 7,552 cu. ft.
744 - 6,371 cu. ft.

That's a difference of 18.5% in favor of the 77W.
 
b747400erf
Posts: 3135
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2013 4:33 am

RE: Less Cargo Planes, More Cargo On Airliners

Wed Jul 09, 2014 1:51 am

Quoting migair54 (Reply 13):

i didn´t know this, but AF is also reducing the cargo operations because with such a big B77W fleet they don´t need the full
cargo planes any longer, and KLM same with Martinair, even SQ has reduce the cargo quite a bit.

I disagree. Those cargo divisions just could not compete with the ones that are growing. Cathay, Emirates for example.

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 15):

That may be true, the question is how many Boeing can sell to keep the line open.

In a few years when the economics of a new 748F outweigh keeping older 747F's or when Boeing starts to lower the price to more reasonable levels.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 27050
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Less Cargo Planes, More Cargo On Airliners

Wed Jul 09, 2014 2:03 am

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 16):
Where did you find the 40% number?

The 777-300ER and A350-1000 have 44 LD3 positions, compared to 32 for the 747-400. That's 37.5% more LD3 positions, which is the metric I was using.
 
blrsea
Posts: 1950
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 2:22 am

RE: Less Cargo Planes, More Cargo On Airliners

Wed Jul 09, 2014 2:11 am

I have a (stupid) question. Since the new widebodies like 77W/359 etc are so huge, and has such big cargo capacity, why can't they have passengers in two levels in 77W/359 etc? They can theoretically have half the lower cargo area for passengers and remaining for their bags etc. Is it because crash landing etc can be fatal(ATRs etc have no cargo space below passengers) or is there any other structural/aerodynamic reason? Granted there may not be space for cargo other than passenger bags, but still, wouldn't it increase the revenue?
 
adriaticus
Posts: 994
Joined: Thu May 06, 2004 3:29 pm

RE: Less Cargo Planes, More Cargo On Airliners

Wed Jul 09, 2014 2:18 am

Quoting migair54 (Reply 2):
And it´s not only this, but all of this B77W will in a few years make a perfect planes for this airlines like FedEx, DHL, UPS to start replacing Md11, DC10, B747.

Not in a few years...

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Mehdi Photos
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Kobayashi


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Christian Junker - AHKGAP



Cheers,
__Ad.>
A300/18/19/20/21/30/32/88 An24 ATR42/72 B721/2 B732/3/G/8/MAX B741/2/4 B752 B762/3/4 B772/3 B788/9 Concorde DC8/9/10 E45/70/75/90/95 IL62/86 MD10-30/11 SA340/2000 TU134/154
 
CALMSP
Posts: 3173
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2003 3:18 am

RE: Less Cargo Planes, More Cargo On Airliners

Wed Jul 09, 2014 2:23 am

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 15):

however, for each freighter that enters the market, for each new 773 that enters the market (and other more friendly cargo planes), all that does is dilute the market share and yield for cargo. Air freight continues to slide in a downward trend. That doesnt mena there isnt freight, there just isnt freight that shippers/forwarders are willing to pay air freight rates.
 
User avatar
sunrisevalley
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

RE: Less Cargo Planes, More Cargo On Airliners

Wed Jul 09, 2014 2:33 am

Quoting LHCVG (Reply 14):
LD3s in the belly work just fine

LD3's for passenger bags and any odd corners . It is the 96"x120" pallets that are filling the space with cargo. Even the much maligned 767 can fit 4 or 5 plus LD8's for baggage
 
Viscount724
Posts: 19316
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:32 pm

RE: Less Cargo Planes, More Cargo On Airliners

Wed Jul 09, 2014 2:41 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 18):
Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 16):
Where did you find the 40% number?

The 777-300ER and A350-1000 have 44 LD3 positions, compared to 32 for the 747-400. That's 37.5% more LD3 positions, which is the metric I was using.

I see Boeing refers to the 744 as holding 32 LD1 containers which appear to have about 9% greater volume (173 cu. ft.) than the LD3 (159 cu. ft.) which they refer to in the equivalent 77W data. So it's sort of an apples and oranges comparison since you're referring to a smaller container than the 744 can handle.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 27050
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Less Cargo Planes, More Cargo On Airliners

Wed Jul 09, 2014 2:49 am

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 23):
So it's sort of an apples and oranges comparison since you're referring to a smaller container than the 744 can handle.

True. So it comes down to whether a 747-400 operator uses LD1s to maximize the capacity or LD3s for ease of interlining with other widebodies in their fleet.
 
rwessel
Posts: 2448
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2007 3:47 pm

RE: Less Cargo Planes, More Cargo On Airliners

Wed Jul 09, 2014 3:36 am

Quoting blrsea (Reply 19):
I have a (stupid) question. Since the new widebodies like 77W/359 etc are so huge, and has such big cargo capacity, why can't they have passengers in two levels in 77W/359 etc? They can theoretically have half the lower cargo area for passengers and remaining for their bags etc. Is it because crash landing etc can be fatal(ATRs etc have no cargo space below passengers) or is there any other structural/aerodynamic reason? Granted there may not be space for cargo other than passenger bags, but still, wouldn't it increase the revenue?

There have been numerous aircraft where you could put lavatories, lounges, crew rest areas, or even seats on the lower deck. I suspect crash consideration and evacuation are going to be issues in many cases, but moving areas not occupied during takeoff and landing down there is certainly doable (and that has the same effect of opening up more space for seating, just on the main deck).
 
User avatar
mayor
Posts: 6218
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 3:58 pm

RE: Less Cargo Planes, More Cargo On Airliners

Wed Jul 09, 2014 4:14 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 7):
Assuming a full passenger load (268 passengers) with two bags per passenger, the 747-400M would use all 8 LD2 / 16 LD3 positions in the front cargo bay for passenger bags (assuming 70 bags per LD2 / 35 bags per LD3, which is the lower end of what I have heard they can fit).

Unless things have changed since I retired, don't the LD-3s haul more bags and/or cargo than the LD-2? Are you talking of putting a single LD-2 in each position in the bin as opposed to two LD-3s. I know in the 767 we were restricted to putting 1 LD-3 in place of the normal 2 LD-2s, mainly because that's the only way they would lock down.



I remember, in the early 70s, when we still had L-100 freighter service, that we were starting to fill up the pallets on the freighter with carts of belly cargo, just to fill the a/c up. That was probably the first sign that the freighter operation was going to go away. The widebodies (747, DC-10 & Tristar) were able to carry almost anything that we used to put on the freighter.

[Edited 2014-07-08 21:20:31]
"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
 
HPRamper
Posts: 5009
Joined: Sat May 14, 2005 4:22 am

RE: Less Cargo Planes, More Cargo On Airliners

Wed Jul 09, 2014 11:34 am

Quoting mayor (Reply 26):
Unless things have changed since I retired, don't the LD-3s haul more bags and/or cargo than the LD-2? Are you talking of putting a single LD-2 in each position in the bin as opposed to two LD-3s. I know in the 767 we were restricted to putting 1 LD-3 in place of the normal 2 LD-2s, mainly because that's the only way they would lock down.

I believe the LD-3 is larger than the LD-2. FX had to order LD-2s to be able to fit side by side in the narrower 767F belly.
 
PanHAM
Posts: 9719
Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 6:44 pm

RE: Less Cargo Planes, More Cargo On Airliners

Wed Jul 09, 2014 11:47 am

Quoting g500 (Thread starter):
excellent read, looks like the airlines' double-dipping of passengers + cargo is delivering handsome rewards

fine, but you have to be a combination carrier to reap in on that reward. FEDEX is neither a combination nor a freight carrier, they are an Integrator and that System works with freighters only.

With the exception of destinations that do not justify an all cargo flight and is therefore transferred to a passenger Airline serving that route. One of the reasons why FX has a hub at CDG with the many African destinations erved from there.


The main reason why many 747 freighters are parket is the end of the Afghan Mission, as before with Iraq, second reason is the fuel Price, making 744 F ops difficult if your income is based on main deck capacity and the comptetion carries passengers as well and consider belly capacity as "fill-up".

Last but not least, sure, the huge caverns of a 77W as well as the 787 and what Airbus has on the market, draw freight from main deck carriers as they can simply offer cheaper rates.

But main deck will stay, on the trunk routes with road Feeder on both Ends.
Was Erlauben Erdogan!!!
 
migair54
Posts: 2437
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2007 4:24 am

RE: Less Cargo Planes, More Cargo On Airliners

Wed Jul 09, 2014 12:02 pm

Quoting B747400ERF (Reply 17):
I disagree. Those cargo divisions just could not compete with the ones that are growing. Cathay, Emirates for example.

I think in the case of EK, QR, TK, EY, the full cargo planes are a consequence of the great sucess the airlines are having with the pax planes and extra cargo space and huge network.

Quoting adriaticus (Reply 20):
Not in a few years...

No, but remember that
-FX has 118 Dc-10/MD-11 and 92 A300/A310 to replace.
-UPS has 13 B747, 59 B767 and 38 MD-11.

So we will see a lot conversions for A330 and B777 in the future.
 
User avatar
sunrisevalley
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

RE: Less Cargo Planes, More Cargo On Airliners

Wed Jul 09, 2014 12:49 pm

Quoting migair54 (Reply 13):
Do you have a link to the article??

here is one link. You will find more on Aspires website..


http://www.aspireaviation.com/wp-con...4/Cathay-FY2013-special-report.pdf
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 27050
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Less Cargo Planes, More Cargo On Airliners

Wed Jul 09, 2014 4:30 pm

Quoting mayor (Reply 26):
Unless things have changed since I retired, don't the LD-3s haul more bags and/or cargo than the LD-2?
Quoting HPRamper (Reply 27):
I believe the LD-3 is larger than the LD-2. FX had to order LD-2s to be able to fit side by side in the narrower 767F belly.

Boeing's 747-400 ACAP refers to a "Full Width LD2" which is equivalent to two LD1s (9.9m3 capacity)

So this is different from the half-width LD2 (3.4m3 capacity) as used on the 767 family.



Quoting migair54 (Reply 29):
No, but remember that
-FX has 118 Dc-10/MD-11 and 92 A300/A310 to replace.
-UPS has 13 B747, 59 B767 and 38 MD-11.

So we will see a lot conversions for A330 and B777 in the future.

I honestly don't believe that FX nor 5X will order the A330-200F.

Instead, I expect that both will chose the 767-300F for their MD-10 family replacements. And I am sure that FX will choose the 767-300F as their A300-600F, A310-200F and A310-300F replacements.

[Edited 2014-07-09 09:33:31]
 
bjorn14
Posts: 3595
Joined: Sat Feb 27, 2010 2:11 pm

RE: Less Cargo Planes, More Cargo On Airliners

Thu Jul 10, 2014 5:44 pm

Anybody know if the 2nd An-225 cshould be built
"I want to know the voice of God the rest is just details" --A. Einstein
 
PanHAM
Posts: 9719
Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 6:44 pm

RE: Less Cargo Planes, More Cargo On Airliners

Thu Jul 10, 2014 8:23 pm

They have other problems in the Ukraine right now. Besides this is more than a niche Player, not suitable for scheduled cargo which applies to ther An124 as well.
Was Erlauben Erdogan!!!
 
User avatar
mayor
Posts: 6218
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 3:58 pm

RE: Less Cargo Planes, More Cargo On Airliners

Thu Jul 10, 2014 11:11 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 31):
Boeing's 747-400 ACAP refers to a "Full Width LD2" which is equivalent to two LD1s (9.9m3 capacity)So this is different from the half-width LD2 (3.4m3 capacity) as used on the 767 family.

Wouldn't that make it the same as the LD-8?
"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 27050
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Less Cargo Planes, More Cargo On Airliners

Thu Jul 10, 2014 11:23 pm

Quoting mayor (Reply 34):
Wouldn't that make it the same as the LD-8?

Per Wikipedia, an LD-8 is equivalent to two half-length LD-2s and offers 6.88m2 of volume.
 
747400sp
Posts: 3900
Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2003 7:27 pm

RE: Less Cargo Planes, More Cargo On Airliners

Thu Jul 10, 2014 11:50 pm

Oh no, well it I guess I have to face it, the 777 may be a better plane than a 747. This sucks for us big quad fans.
 
User avatar
sunrisevalley
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

RE: Less Cargo Planes, More Cargo On Airliners

Fri Jul 11, 2014 12:18 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 35):
Per Wikipedia, an LD-8 is equivalent to two half-length LD-2s and offers 6.88m2 of volume.

shouldn't 6.88m2 read 6.88m3   
 
747400sp
Posts: 3900
Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2003 7:27 pm

RE: Less Cargo Planes, More Cargo On Airliners

Fri Jul 11, 2014 12:49 am

Quoting migair54 (Reply 29):
No, but remember that
-FX has 118 Dc-10/MD-11 and 92 A300/A310 to replace.
-UPS has 13 B747, 59 B767 and 38 MD-11.

So we will see a lot conversions for A330 and B777 in the future.

FX A300s, may stay for a while, remember they did get brand new A300Fs in 2007. Yes they were the last ones, but they still are fairly young.
 
Chaostheory
Posts: 1147
Joined: Wed Mar 06, 2013 2:09 am

RE: Less Cargo Planes, More Cargo On Airliners

Fri Jul 11, 2014 1:32 am

This FX fleet plan may have changed recently.

http://i1312.photobucket.com/albums/t534/chaostheory2/fxfleet_zps01f8f8c1.jpg
 
ltbewr
Posts: 15027
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:24 pm

RE: Less Cargo Planes, More Cargo On Airliners

Fri Jul 11, 2014 2:43 am

I understand that there are limits as to what freight can be on a passenger flight. What would be the banned freight items or restriction on weight/volume of certain forms of freight on pax airlines ? For example what about items with lithium or like batteries ?

I would suspect there are several factors in the rise in the use of pax flights for cargo. Highly time sensitive products, high value products (luxury goods, prescription drugs), temperature sensitivity and other specifications. I would also suspect many pax flights may serve more directly, faster or more frequently to many destinations for freight than on freighters that might go to a more distant 'hub' airport.
 
User avatar
mayor
Posts: 6218
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 3:58 pm

RE: Less Cargo Planes, More Cargo On Airliners

Fri Jul 11, 2014 2:59 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 35):
Per Wikipedia, an LD-8 is equivalent to two half-length LD-2s and offers 6.88m2 of volume.

That's what I thought, too.....I guess I've never seen a "Full Width LD-2". We always had LD-3s, LD-11s, LD-2s and LD-8s and various pallets.
"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
 
PanHAM
Posts: 9719
Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 6:44 pm

RE: Less Cargo Planes, More Cargo On Airliners

Fri Jul 11, 2014 8:27 am

Boeing just released the 20 year forcast. the Outlook for wide Body freighters in Service by 2034 is as follows:

over 80 tons: 590 new 8assuming that most of These will be 777F but there could be some 748F as well and, who knows, a 787F

over 80 tons 370 conversions

40 to 80 tons 250 new build

The latter would be shared by the 767F and the 330F and assuming that most of These fly for the Integrators, there is Little room for that class with the classic freight and combination carriers who will mostly fly cargo VLA
Was Erlauben Erdogan!!!
 
tsnamm
Posts: 563
Joined: Wed May 04, 2005 3:28 am

RE: Less Cargo Planes, More Cargo On Airliners

Fri Jul 11, 2014 5:47 pm

LD2's & LD4/8's are designed for 767 lower deck...LD3 & LD11 are for 747,777, DC-10,MD-11 A300/310/330/340/350/380...LD2's are banned from use on our 747-400's, you can move the locks in on a 777 to make DPE's fit, but it is essentially a waste of space compared to an LD3.
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 3295
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

RE: Less Cargo Planes, More Cargo On Airliners

Fri Jul 11, 2014 6:26 pm

Quoting blrsea (Reply 19):
I have a (stupid) question. Since the new widebodies like 77W/359 etc are so huge, and has such big cargo capacity, why can't they have passengers in two levels in 77W/359 etc?

Since no one addressed this, here is my (semi-educated) answer:

Current lower deck are only design for equipment and cargo and is only required to withstand lower crash loading (can't recall if it's 6g's or 3'g forward). In order to support passenger seats in the lower deck you would have to substantially increase the gauges of the lower deck floor and frames to handle the 9'g static and 16'g dynamic crash load requirement of passenger seats.


bt.
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
747400sp
Posts: 3900
Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2003 7:27 pm

RE: Less Cargo Planes, More Cargo On Airliners

Fri Jul 11, 2014 6:44 pm

I guess the 777-9X going to cream the air freighter market.

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