Old B74F aircraft and their operations

[Sleeping Freight Dog]

In the last year or so, there have been many new cargo airlines
proposing to start up using very old B74F aircraft, Ocean Air,
Cargo B, Jett 8, Pronair to mention a few. These aircraft are
notorious fuel guzzlers and maintenance queens. In this age
of Jet A being at or near $100 a barrel, what is the real feasibility
of these old birds making a profit for someone? How can anyone
think they will have a viable business plan with an aircraft that
costs more to operate, carries less payload and may have limited
spares? On another view, what is going to happen to the 6 B742F
that Ocean was buying from Air France?? How much longer can
FO and FE's expect to make a living flying the ole queen of the skies?

[masterairwaybill]

You hit the nail on the head,
Unless you can achieve high payload factors on every sector (>70%) and good yield combined with high utilisation (+300hrs) it is virtually impossible to make money. Only way it can be done is to achieve economies of scale by having a number in yourt fleet and combining this with other services with other aircraft it is possible e.g. through using cargo capacity in passenger aircraft. The combined result can be good as you can achieve good overall yield.
As for AF 747 which Ocean is "suppossed" to have acquired. I think you will find they are not belonged to Ocean but to a leasing company in Austria or to a company based in USA

[Junkflyer]

Connie has 100's and 200's in his fleet.(400's to start coming this year) They have been purchased for bottom dollar so there is not a huge monthly lease payment. The flights leaving Hong Kong have been ferried in from the Middle East or the Pacific. Whatever he is doing apparently works well for him.

[CargoOne]

The very simple answer is that you CANNOT these days start an airline with 744. There are no 744F available for sale or lease and when/if they coming on the market, your start-up airline will be number 17 in a list of interested clients so you would not get it anyway. And unless you a close relative of Royal family ruling some nice sandy country it is very doubtful you have finances to order a brand new aircraft (means bring quite some money upfront!) and then wait wait wait for your production slot.

Costs more to operate? Yes but you have no choise. Carries more payload? Not really, a proper 747-200F takes as much as 747-400BCF. Better range-payload? Yes but not necessarely you need it and even you need it, not necessarely you can use it. Burns more fuel? Yes but not so big difference and even at today's jet-a1 rates the lease price difference still almost covers this.

It is more about airline & management than aircraft type. There are companies making money with 742F, with DC10s and even, still, with DC8s and 727s!

Overall you have a choise - either you starting with 742 and then growing, stabilizing and one day taking 744s (and there are success stories), or not starting at all.

[AAL]

MK Airlines dont seem to be doing so badly with their 742's. They are flying huge volumes at near capacity.

Have cargo will fly, some legs pay better and some just to subsidise positioning to next good load.

Cargo southbound out of Europe to Africa pays up to three times better than over same leg northbound, but notwithstanding still makes good economical sense even with a 742.

Even DC-10's and DC-8's can still make money from Europe to Africa if they limit their flights to the equator region and then some cheap return cargo.

IMHO there is much latitude still for good reliable 742's.

[Sleeping Freight Dog]

Good Points made by all. I am not putting down the B742F per say,
I know it is a great aircraft. I was refering more to the older B741F
and the unique ones with the 70A engines like Pronair is using.
Connie has done well with their older aircraft acquired for minimal
costs compared with the new start ups, and then getting higher
utilization from them. When they step up to B744BCFs, I think they
will do great. Case in Point, Focus Air. They started out with 2 and
then a third reasonably mid age classics, were set for expansion
and growth, but now are struggling to stay alive. Ocean Air
picked up some well maintained ex-LH birds and had a viable plan,
but they too are in dire straights. I know the Europe to Africa market
is still a viable area, but with the backhaul getting cheaper and cheaper,
even this market is not as strong as it was.

[GlueBall]

Factory freighter -400 payload typically 125Kgs, cost $200+ Million
converted -400 freighter payload 115Kgs $60+
converted -200 freighter payload 107Kgs $25+

[BelArgUSA]

747-200F or 747-400F...?
Gas guzzlers...
Three cockpit crewmembers or two...
xxx
I am afraid most of you got it quite wrong...
xxx
Payload, we have leased 747-271C that had a max payload of 110,500 kg.
Same airline offered us a 747-400F for lease with 116,000 payload.
The 747-400 was some $1,000/hour more than a 747-200...
Both airplanes required an intermediate stop on the route Argentina/Europe.
xxx
Fuel - There was a small advantage for the fuel burn on the 400F...
With equal payload, savings would be 4,000 kg (5,100 liters) for sector Argentina/Europe.
The fuel savings do not offset the higher cost of the airplane.
xxx
Crewing...
Because of duty/flight time, crew of 3 is required on both types...
Captain + F/O + F/E crew cost in Argentina is less than 2 captains + 1 F/O.
xxx
So where are the savings...?
xxx
All these new "entrants" in the air cargo market go belly-up after a few month.
The old-timers, Evergreen, Kalitta, Southern Air, Polar are happy with old 747 freighters.
xxx
:)
Happy contrails

[clevlandHD]

Why are Atlas and Kalitta trading their classics for -400 then?

[BelArgUSA]

ClevlandHD...
xxx
Trading...?
I think Kalitta will be retiring a few 747-100SFs.
And will take a few 747-400...
The brunt of his fleet will be still 200s for a few years.
I think their fleet is nearly 20 airplanes right now...
I dont call that "trading"...
xxx
:)
Happy contrails

[EAM]

Crewing...
Because of duty/flight time, crew of 3 is required on both types...
Captain + F/O + F/E crew cost in Argentina is less than 2 captains + 1 F/O.
xxx

Well thats not quite the same, a FE does not count as augmented crew.
-200/-400 2 Pilots+1FE/2Pilots, up to 14h 3Pilots+2FE/3 Pilots, more than 14h.
Well at least its like this un europe, may be different in argentina.

[BelArgUSA]

Correct - is different - Argentina basically uses US/FAA 121 type rules.
Crew of 3 - call it 2 pilots + F/E, or 3 pilots is same limitations.
12 hrs flight time limitations, 16 hrs duty time...
xxx
:)
Happy contrails

P.S. with 2 pilots, the flight time limit is 8 hrs flight time, 12 hrs duty...

[EAM]

Ok, I see, so with 2 Pilots +1 FE no one can really sleep like beeing with 3 pilots.

Anyway, back to topic, one of the reason that quite a few -200 are flying around, is the lack of alternatives.
What else can you get, MD-11 almost impossible, B744 quite difficult, but a bit better now, 767 too small, 777F and 330F coming out in 2009.
So if you start up you can choose btw. 742 and DC-10.

[L-38]

For info, I recall perusing a flight plan for both types - ANC/ICN. 744 required about 90,000lbs, 742 required 108,000lbs. Payload was the same.

[GlueBall]

L-38 do you remember if your classic had Rollers? The RB-524DX4s burn less than the GEs and Pratts.

[CR2]

BelArgUsa... I know you used to fly the same -271C as I did. Extended (variable) ZFW. 118.5T (BCV), couple of hundred less for A/ECV.

400F... 129.5T extended (variable), best I've seen.

Couple of hundred kgs up or down depending on OEW (DOW if you prefer).

[Junkflyer]

I don't think Connie will retire any airplane until they reach a hard limit or inspection that is too costly. The 400's will be additions and the classics seem to stay fairly busy. The last couple of 200's came on property just a few months ago.

[Dan Winterland]

The 400 is a much more reliable aircraft and running costs are much less. fuel burn on average 2T an hour less, and maintenance much easier with the Central Maintenace Computer. My last airline estimated their 400s had about half the maintenance costs of the classics. Ansd my current airline is replacing it's Classic freighters with 400BCFs.

Shame to see the FEs go. Am losing some good mates.

[BelArgUSA]

In full agreement that a 747-400F is more economical than a 747-200F...
Or that a MD-11F is more economical than a DC-10F...
But...
As to say that the older ones are gas guzzlers, sure, they are.
xxx
Is like having a (let's say) an old Cadillac Limousine...
Big V8 6 liters, gas 22 liters for 100 km...
And replacing that junk by a new Caddy Limo... high efficiency engine.
And "only" 19 liters for 100 km...
For me, it is still a guzzler... just a "tat" less...
The old Cadillac was cheap, no bank payments, cheap insurance...
The trunk was large enough for 8 suicases...
The new one makes banks and insurance companies happy.
And in the trunk, they can put... 9 suitcases...
xxx
Obvious, if I organize a new "BeArgUSA Cargo" I might lease a few 200Fs...
That is all that the banks and leasing companies will let me have.
A "small" say, 20 or 30 million $ investment...
I will spend a lot in maintenance, and crewing...
But the banks will say NO to a couple of used 400Fs, and give me 100 million $...
Besides, giving banks $250,000 of interest monthly...
I rather buy spare parts, a spare engine, pay my people a good salary.
Even if it costs over $100,000...
All "within proportion"...
And if not, I go out of business after 6 months, like many "ex-new cargo operators"...
xxx
:)
Happy contrails

[Dan Winterland]

Agreed in principle. But the accountant will find the argument in favour of the 744, wheras the pilot in the know can argue the case for the classic. However, we all know that the outfits buying the 744s have serious capital behind them, wheras the classic purchasers are either dreamers who think they can make the operation work on goodwill, prayers and good luck, or are shysters who are in it to make a fast buck and know the operation will go belly up as soon as the first engine change is needed.

A friend of mine is an investment banker who is setting up a freight airline. he likes to point out that pilots are under the illusion that aircraft fly because of the laws of aerodynamics. When in reality, they fly because of the laws of economics.

He's purchasing 744s BTW.

[BelArgUSA]

Dear Dan -
xxx
I am just a pilot (and old fart at that)...!
I studied aerodynamics... flunked eko-no-meeks...
Cannot even spell that word.
All the best.
xxx
:)
Happy contrails

[BelArgUSA]

... accountants never studied aerodynamics...
... or flight planning, routes selection, wind and level trades.
... they cannot read a TAF.
... they get upset if we require 3T extra fuel and take 3T off payload.
... they think all works as Mr. Boeing's salesman claimed the plane will do.
... they forget a 2% performance degradation factor.
... at 5:00pm local time, they go home.
... while I hurry to airport, to be advised of freight trucks by road 4 hrs late
... and when I fly, I still try to save fuel, but never get even a thank you.
xxx
:*
Happy contrails

[layinlow]

There is no doubt the -400 carries "more for less" than the older jurrasic jumbo. However, when you take in the cost of aquiring a "gucci jet" vs, the older jumbo, the cost factor difference gets a lot narrower. I am sure that the Kallita classics and Southern jumbos are making them money, otherwise they would not be ramping up the fleets.
The FAA is making it a bit harder for the "aging fleet" by requiring more extensive inspections. That may be the death of the older aircraft. Maintenance costs can go through the roof. But the "old lady" can still deliver, and will, until the forces of economics finally catches up. Let's hope it is a long way out.

[clevlandHD]

Many of those aircrafts are flying stuff for the war in Irak. If you remove that "economic" sector, the demand for heavy transport would fall and many operators (who are now making buckets of money from that) would go under.

[BelArgUSA]

I wish USA taxpayers woud know...
xxx
Some, if not all USA cargo operations fly supplies to Iraq... and Afghanistan...
Big money, Air Force fuel...
They offload in Bagdad, Kuwait, in Kabul...
xxx
Thereafter, funny things happen...
They max their fuel tanks (free Air Force fuel again)
"for a empty trip back to the US of A..."
...
But... on the way back they stop...
Call it Franfurt, Amsterdam, Luxembourg, London...
And they load cargo, for LH, KL, CV or BA... destination US of A...!
xxx
And Connie and the others go to the banks for another deposit...
:D
Happy contrails

[Willit Run]

No more free fuel for the taking. That only happens when war is classified as a real "WAR".

I don't think Connie paid more than 5 million for any of his airplanes. They are all paid for. owes nada! The amount of money he saves on monthly payments to the bank, he can buy a whole lot of fuel!
We fairy empty airplanes to HKG, Korea and China, and still make a profit at the end of the trip! Anyone who says you can't make money with a classic really does not know what they are talking about.

Our -100's still have a viable niche in this market. They are great for 5-6 hour legs and can still carry 200,000 lbs comfortably. Most of our -200's have "Q" powered Pratts, one "R" powered and a few "J" powered. Our 2, 750,000 lb. -100's have "J"motors installed.

The -400's will probably be financed, but I assure you, our -400's will be acquired for far less than market value. Thats the way the man operates. Thats how he makes money.

[BelArgUSA]

Willit Run...
I did not know it was not a real war...:eek:
xxx
You guys run empty to HKG and still make money with payload one-way only?
That is impressive - Hooray for Connie...
I know Evergreen used to do that, long ago, when they were flirting with JAL.
They also own their older planes outright...
And as you say "no plane payments" - you think same frequency as my brains.
xxx
I ferried N712CK (ex-Connie) to deliver to the Sheik of Dubai... was 2001...
Then flew it around with race horses, for 30 days to train the Dubai crews.
Was surprised he sold it, was a fairly good machine, ex-Kuwait -269 with SCD.
Heard Connie had so many problems with floors and doors of some 100s...
Guess they were called GATX STC doors and floors.
But that was 10 years ago. Surprise to hear some -100SFs still active.
xxx
All the best to you
:)
Happy contrails

[Willit Run]

BelArg,
I think we have 5 -100's flying, 3-734,000 and 2 -750,000 lb birds.
As for the war, its not an official "WAR" anymore, according to the DOD. Police Action I think.
There are so many facets of the cargo world that make the older planes so attractive. Some economists think in a narrow field, that thinking outside the box(no pun intended) doesn't fit their business plan, and they think flying older planes isn't economical.

Were up to 19 right now. We have CMC FMS's with EHSI's and EADI's.GNSS updating, plus a Litton 92 w/ updating and a Trimble 2101. Our W&B is all computerized as well as our performance. EFB's are on the way as well as electronic Engine instruments for the front and back. Manuels are all on Disc and our weather radar is being updated to overlay on the EHSI's. As far as Classics go, they are pretty cool.

[L-38]

Info - scrap value of a B-742 (without engines) -about $40,000

[dusk2dawn]

How about noise in them old -100s ?

[Dutch74]

PARTS.

This is Connie's and Southern's angle. And this is why Focus and Ocean Air are struggling. Connie has his own heavy MX and Southern has a huge supply of parts and their own engine shop.

Plus these carriers will fly and aircraft until it is within hours of needing a heavy "D" check, then park them. This gives them a huge tax write-off, plus they can sell or lease parts from these aircraft they have parked and get top dollar for the parts since they come off an acft that is still flyable (Even though it is within a few hours of not being flyable).

This allows Connie and Southern to lease their acft at very attractive rates to a customer. Something Ocean Air and Focus are unable to do.

[Junkflyer]

Connie has quite a parts supply also. He bought some pax birds from JAL just for parts. Up in Oscoda it looks like a 74 boneyard. I heard he got government money to build a new hangar too.

[Maeshe]

Some numbers to consider:

Based on factory -400F (as opposed to -400BCF)
Fuel burn benefit over -200F = approx 200USG/hr.
Over 8 hr sector, at USD3.00 per USG = USD4,800 benefit.

ACMI rate for -400F circa USD6500 per hr
ACMI rate for -200F circa USD4300 per hr
Difference = USD2200 per hour in favour of -200F.
Total over 8 hr sector = USD17,600.

Hence, assuming all other costs equal, operating cost benefit for -200F = USD12,800.

But then look at payload - in practice you'll be luck to get 95t chargeable weight on -200F for 8 hr sector. For a -400F, you can easily plan on 110t chargeable weight. Difference 15t.

At USD3.00/kg, extra revenue is USD45,000 in favour of -400F.
At USD2.00/kg, extra revenue is USD30,000
At USD1.00/kg, extra revenue is USD15,000

Hence, over 8 hrs, with full payloads,the -400F wins by a country mile at high yields and even at lower yields...

But....at 6hr sectors, the difference is less. Operating cost benefit for -200F is down to USD9,600. But payload difference drops to maybe, for arguments sake, say 5t.

At USD3/kg = extra rev USD15k, so USD5k benefit for -400F
At USD2/kg = extra rev of USD10k, so benefit only USD400, ie evens
At USD1/kg = extra rev of USD5k, benfit in favour of -200F by almost USD5k.

So, for the -400F to make sense, you need good cargo yield, full payloads over longer sectors and high fuel prices.

As soon as your payloads or yields fall, then even the high fuel prices do not make the -400F a winner.

Conclusion - they are both winners depending on where they operate and how they are operated. Put either on the right route and it can make money. But fail to fill them up, let them break, and then you have an almight finacial headache....:=

[TRIM-RUN]

We buy/sell and part out the 200/300 series 747 pax and freight.

747-300 Pax JT9D-7R4G2 $5 Million ( one year flying left)

747-300 Pax No engines for part out $950,000.00

Also on the lot there is a friend of ours with a -70A powered -200 for sale. He wants around the $6.5 Million for it.

SAA 747-400 went to the Russians for around the $35 Million mark each in as is / where is condition.

According to Aircraft Values News a 747-400F still pulls $750,000.00 lease rate per month as compared to $80,000.00 to $120,000.00 for a youngish -200F.

[BelArgUSA]

Oh oh oh...
xxx
747-271F for sale, JT9D-70A motors...
Outstanding engines... (provided you NEVER ever deploy reversers).
One reverser cycle = aircraft AOG for next 30 days.
xxx
If you deploy the 4 reversers after landing, might be forced to taxi to ramp backwards.
Not easy to "powerback" with a whale...
I would suggest that specific training, to the crews of your future customer.
xxx
The "Queens" of Seabord World Airlines... in memoriam...
xxx
:)
Happy contrails

[acmi48]

271f 2r7f

this model was i think limited to tow 820000 lbs and ldw 620000 lbs with no extended zero fuel x max payload around 110000 kgs gross
maeshe good call on figures-these are spot on for today's market on acmi for classic and 400f

200f are good for africa and south am..not so much asia ,unless hkg in season and one stop to europe via a cis country and a good fuel price
ie: kgf!!!

70a will not make noise regulations in europe soon.

[Flight Detent]

Hey BelArgUSA,
I sometimes wondered where some of those ex-Kuwaiti 747-269's went, I used to fly 'em in Kuwait Airways, left there in DEC94.
That's when they parked 2 of their 4 747-269's, as they made the mistake of buying A340's, needless to say, the 74's were back in service a couple of months later!

Cheers, FD :rolleyes:

[Sleeping Freight Dog]

Looks like it is time to revive this thread.
With Focus Air, Ocean, and now Tradewinds closing or shutting
down their B747F Classic operations, and fuel at $130USD a barrel,
will the economics of running such aircraft be coming to an end??
On the other hand, with fewer carriers in the ACMI business now,
traffic might be better for the remaining players.

[Kitsune]

If the Democrats get in and reduce the forces in Iraq then all those 'Reach' callsigns are going to come crashing back into the commercial market. The ensuing dogfight will be what finishes off the carriers that are marginal, and will be the demise of the 'steamer' as well.

As an aside, CXs latest plan is to use the Classic round Asia on less than 6hr sectors and then transfer the frieight to EU and US via -400. As long as you've got the maintenance and spares backup (as CX has) keeping the -400 in the air for 14hrs and the Classic on the ground in CGK or somewhere waiting for freight still makes commercial sense, or the beancounters at CX would have cut them in a New York minute.............:cool:

[superspotter]

Well, the two ex Focus machines have a new home even if the price of oil has gone ballistic..........

[acmi48]

where are TFAAA and TFAAB.. ?? customer is waiting for their arrival:oh:

[TowerDog]

I sometimes wondered where some of those ex-Kuwaiti 747-269's went, I used to fly 'em in Kuwait Airways, left there in DEC94.

Flew 'em too, left the sandbox in January 94.

Spent a total of 15 years on the classics for various operators, good old birds...RIP now that oil is $140.00 per barrel.

[superspotter]

TFAAA due into Lux Tuesday, AAB in August.

[SNS3Guppy]

Many of those aircrafts are flying stuff for the war in Irak. If you remove that "economic" sector, the demand for heavy transport would fall and many operators (who are now making buckets of money from that) would go under.


Iraq. No...much of the cargo being moved is mail and other requiremements that are subcontracted out. Operators such as Kalitta would scarcely go under if the military contracts went away. You might be surprised how much demand and use there is for ACMI flying by others than the military. The Civil Reserve Aircraft Fleet utilizes not only ACMI carriers, but carriers who have passenger and freight operations who are prepared and required to place a substantial amout of their fleet to government use should the need arise. This is known as a force multiplier.

Some, if not all USA cargo operations fly supplies to Iraq... and Afghanistan...
Big money, Air Force fuel...
They offload in Bagdad, Kuwait, in Kabul...
xxx
Thereafter, funny things happen...
They max their fuel tanks (free Air Force fuel again)
"for a empty trip back to the US of A..."


It's not free fuel, and in most cases the operator obtains the fuel. Where fuel is provided, it's factored into the cost of the operation, and is hardly "free."

I'm in Hong Kong at the moment, where we ferried empty after a location in the middle east, definitely not on military fuel. We have goods to carry from here headed eastbound as part of the regular trip around the globe. The military didn't pay to put us here, nor is this flight military. We'd be here regardless of the military contracts, and without the benifit of military fuel, just as we are at this moment.

You guys run empty to HKG and still make money with payload one-way only?
That is impressive -


The airplane has made money all the way around, and will keep making it all the way home, too. The airplanes pay for us, pay for themselves, pay the company, and earn a profit.

How about noise in them old -100s ?


How about them? They're still earning a living. The -100's are weight restricted to meet noise issues in some locations, and operated accordingly. Additionally, flaps at 25 max is often used with weights adjusted accordingly, where necessary. Not a problem.

747-271F for sale, JT9D-70A motors...
Outstanding engines... (provided you NEVER ever deploy reversers).
One reverser cycle = aircraft AOG for next 30 days.


We have -7A engines on some airplanes, and use the reversers every landing, of course. Then quick turn and go again. They work. An occasional flame-out or other problem, yes. But they work.

[sidman]

He was talking about -70 PW engines not -7A. Poople had alot of trouble with the -70 engine. I think pratt made it to compete with the GE CF6 engine.

[acmi48]

200f acmi operators are looking VERY closely at the figures now-the potential profit margins are next to nothing- look for hourly rates of 4000 usd p/blk hr soon to find customers

[Kitsune]

http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=330486 :confused:

[Atlanta-Driver]

The ex Kuwaiti -200's are sitting in RUH as of 2 days ago.