Containers VS pallets VS nets
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2022
Location: Canada
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Containers VS pallets VS nets
There are a number of cargo conversion programs going on, now, in smaller regional turboprops and jets, much smaller than Boeing and Airbus types.
It sure looks like the containers can go on and off quickly, pallets maybe the same. There seem to be a lot of package-freighter conversions out there on regional jets and turboprops, so somebody thinks it's the way to go, but I don't get it. The loose cargo must take forever to load a piece at a time.
My question is what are the relative advantages of putting freight in containers, or strapping it on pallets, versus loading it loose and securing the zones with nets?
It sure looks like the containers can go on and off quickly, pallets maybe the same. There seem to be a lot of package-freighter conversions out there on regional jets and turboprops, so somebody thinks it's the way to go, but I don't get it. The loose cargo must take forever to load a piece at a time.
My question is what are the relative advantages of putting freight in containers, or strapping it on pallets, versus loading it loose and securing the zones with nets?
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: uk
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The biggest factor during the conversion is the size of the cargo door and width of the aircraft. There is a certain size the door needed in order for the pallets or containers to fit. Also the height of the aircraft is also a consideration since you would need a low loader to get containers into the aircraft and then you have the consideration of can you park this loader next to the aircraft. You could have a low loader adapted to do this job but then you have the added headache of how to off load an aircraft should it divert.
As for loading times it is more work to load individual packages but by fitting a roller system to the aircraft and using a cargo belt plus a few more loaders loading time can be relatively quick. This can further be reduced if you can load the aircraft from the back and the front at the same time. Don’t forget the the turbo prop aircraft tend to be smaller so they cannot accommodate as much freight as the bigger jets.
As for loading times it is more work to load individual packages but by fitting a roller system to the aircraft and using a cargo belt plus a few more loaders loading time can be relatively quick. This can further be reduced if you can load the aircraft from the back and the front at the same time. Don’t forget the the turbo prop aircraft tend to be smaller so they cannot accommodate as much freight as the bigger jets.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2022
Location: Canada
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks Jim,
I've taken a look at the loading trucks around the airports and it seems they don't have to lift very high to reach the deck of a TP.
The ones I see seem able to do this - don't they scissor up to any height you need?
Point well taken that you'll need an itty-bitty container for most of these regional narrow bodies.
For package loading, are you referring to the kind of belt loader used for luggage, or something that gets carried into the aircraft?
Loading from front and back simultaneously didn't occur to me but yes, that sounds quite practical if you have a front and back door.
Sounds like your main point there is that these regionals are too small for it to take too long, no matter how you load.
FYI I am thinking about the various conversions popping up for Dash 8's, ATR's and Embraers, in case it wasn't obvious.
I've taken a look at the loading trucks around the airports and it seems they don't have to lift very high to reach the deck of a TP.
The ones I see seem able to do this - don't they scissor up to any height you need?
Point well taken that you'll need an itty-bitty container for most of these regional narrow bodies.
For package loading, are you referring to the kind of belt loader used for luggage, or something that gets carried into the aircraft?
Loading from front and back simultaneously didn't occur to me but yes, that sounds quite practical if you have a front and back door.
Sounds like your main point there is that these regionals are too small for it to take too long, no matter how you load.
FYI I am thinking about the various conversions popping up for Dash 8's, ATR's and Embraers, in case it wasn't obvious.
Moderator
There are some other things to consider. At the end of the day, there is no one size fits all best solution.
First, volumetric restrictions are very important and may present critical constraints on whatever solution you might fancy.
The best payload arrangement (ie weight) is a stripped cabin and bulk loading. Penalty is time to load and unload and the maximum package weight/size which can be manhandled into and out of the cabin.
If you want to go for conveyors, that's fine, but are you going to have them at all ports ? There is a capital and ongoing maintenance cost as well as time and labour costs for an each time set up and removal. A cost/benefit analysis will yield an answer to the question of whether they might be a good idea for particular circumstances.
You can design and manufacture suitable pallets to suit. I did that, decades ago, for several Bristol Frighteners. Relatively low cost, not too much weight added to the cabin and improved loading/unloading times significantly.
You can go the certificated ULD route but you then have to pick from the standard can sizes and there is an empty weight penalty for the aircraft mods if you are looking at integral restraint. The best setup I ever worked with was the roll-on roll-off arrangement IPEC used on their Argosies, now long gone. See, for example, AWA ARGOSY (chota.me.uk) seventh photo from the top. Doors front and back - push the inbound cans off one end as those for the next leg come in at the other. Worked an absolute treat.
Certainly, not a simple matter overall but there are options.
First, volumetric restrictions are very important and may present critical constraints on whatever solution you might fancy.
The best payload arrangement (ie weight) is a stripped cabin and bulk loading. Penalty is time to load and unload and the maximum package weight/size which can be manhandled into and out of the cabin.
If you want to go for conveyors, that's fine, but are you going to have them at all ports ? There is a capital and ongoing maintenance cost as well as time and labour costs for an each time set up and removal. A cost/benefit analysis will yield an answer to the question of whether they might be a good idea for particular circumstances.
You can design and manufacture suitable pallets to suit. I did that, decades ago, for several Bristol Frighteners. Relatively low cost, not too much weight added to the cabin and improved loading/unloading times significantly.
You can go the certificated ULD route but you then have to pick from the standard can sizes and there is an empty weight penalty for the aircraft mods if you are looking at integral restraint. The best setup I ever worked with was the roll-on roll-off arrangement IPEC used on their Argosies, now long gone. See, for example, AWA ARGOSY (chota.me.uk) seventh photo from the top. Doors front and back - push the inbound cans off one end as those for the next leg come in at the other. Worked an absolute treat.
Certainly, not a simple matter overall but there are options.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2022
Location: Canada
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks John for your interesting perspectives.
Not a lot of front-and-back-loading cargo haulers like the Argosy any more.
If you like old British types, some Bristol freighters did the rounds of Canada's north, and one is proudly still on display in Yellowknife if you care to visit.
Just the other day I had a surprise chance to walk through and take pictures of a Shorts C-23C Sherpa, formerly of the US Army. What a perfect vehicle for hauling containers - a LD3 would fit inside nicely, though getting it up the ramp would require a winch and this Sherpa didn't have one, and the mounts for it were buggered. Perhaps lower the ramp onto the deck of the loading truck... The fellow importing this one into Canada will have a fight on his hands because it's a former military plane, not a true civilian model.
Not a lot of front-and-back-loading cargo haulers like the Argosy any more.
If you like old British types, some Bristol freighters did the rounds of Canada's north, and one is proudly still on display in Yellowknife if you care to visit.
Just the other day I had a surprise chance to walk through and take pictures of a Shorts C-23C Sherpa, formerly of the US Army. What a perfect vehicle for hauling containers - a LD3 would fit inside nicely, though getting it up the ramp would require a winch and this Sherpa didn't have one, and the mounts for it were buggered. Perhaps lower the ramp onto the deck of the loading truck... The fellow importing this one into Canada will have a fight on his hands because it's a former military plane, not a true civilian model.
