PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Rumours & News (https://www.pprune.org/rumours-news-13/)
-   -   A380 combi conversion underway (https://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/632223-a380-combi-conversion-underway.html)

Pugilistic Animus 7th May 2020 00:36


Originally Posted by chuboy (Post 10773872)
https://aeronewsglobal.com/lufthansa...go-conversion/

A potentially very interesting use for the A380 given the likely future flying environment, which will surely be focused on consolidating the few travelling pax to hub to hub routes. Keep upper deck for pax, main deck and lower decks for cargo. The whale may live to turn over a buck or two for its operators yet.

Sorry to say but the A380 may be on its way to meet Jesus. As TdRacer has said a few times why. That huge jet as cargo plane is untenable. Shame we seem to be losing all of the passenger four holers.

Airbubba 7th May 2020 01:17


Originally Posted by JanetFlight (Post 10774842)
Talking about the 380...is this really the end..??? :(


Originally Posted by Pugilistic Animus (Post 10774853)
Sorry to say but the A380 may be on its way to meet Jesus. As TdRacer has said a few times why. That huge jet as cargo plane is untenable. Shame we seem to be losing all of the passenger four holers.


'We know the A380 is over, the 747 is over but the A350 and the 787 will always have a place.' - Emirates President Tim Clark
https://www.pprune.org/middle-east/6...tim-clark.html

Sir Tim probably now says the fool that ordered all those EK A380s should be shot! ;)


Emirates Airline President Tim Clark: The A380 “defies gravity” in its success story
https://www.airbus.com/newsroom/news...ess-story.html

CargoOne 7th May 2020 01:28

My best educated guess they are doing the same “conversion” which is already done for A320 and A330 family - removal of seats and using the floor space for cargo to be secured by cargo nets attached to the seat rails. There are many limitations coming with it like accessibility in flight for inspection and firefighting. Also the floor load limits remain the same as pax which is a far cry from real freighter. It can only work for medical masks transportation which are in a high demand right now ex China. Typical ratio we see is 10 cubic meters to 1 ton, no idea how much they will get cubic wise but MZFW hardly would be a problem. It is a reasonably cheap temporary solution which is only feasible during the current rush, however the STC is reasonably cheap and the only mod cost is seats removal. I must admit the upper deck loading of A380 might be a problem - it is all about manual labor and access.

zerograv 7th May 2020 01:44


Originally Posted by tdracer (Post 10774671)
Probably a niche freighter aircraft at best.

Also think so !

Bear in mind that Cargo has two important details. One is weight. The other is volume.

The year was 2010, there was a oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, and here I go to Houston on completly packed 767 with floating barriers. You would not be able to fit anything else inside. The payload was some 30 tons. A light payload for a 76.

Airbubba 7th May 2020 03:12

1 Attachment(s)

Originally Posted by longisland (Post 10774702)
UAL had either 20 or 25 of the 727-100QC (Quick Change) model. Pax seats on pallets or air freight tied down to pallets. The pallets with the passenger seats were stored in a big van like mobile unit.

One of them crashed on takeoff from KORD (1968?) and was demolished. The 3 pilot crew was injured but all survived. Inadvertent selection of 2deg flaps vice 5deg for takeoff.

The ORD 727QC crash was United 9963 on March 21, 1968. It was the classic 'ignore the takeoff warning horn' mishap which sadly would be repeated several times in the years to follow.

See: https://www.tailstrike.com/210368.htm

SWBKCB 7th May 2020 07:00

Already been done by Malaysian - suspect all this talk about A380 freighters is only relevant to the current need for PPE.

MASKargo A380 in cargo-only flight ‘first’

cats_five 7th May 2020 07:32


Originally Posted by lomapaseo (Post 10774193)
Hmmm, why did the shipping industry over the sea go to giant container ships? Could it be because it was cheaper to load/unload one ship instead of several at a time?

A vessel with twice the capacity doesn't need twice the crew, or twice the fuel.

TwinJock 7th May 2020 13:35

Pity that the operating cost on the A380 is 3 X that of the B777. USD 27 500 vs USD 9000.

ATC Watcher 7th May 2020 15:21


Originally Posted by TwinJock (Post 10775409)
Pity that the operating cost on the A380 is 3 X that of the B777. USD 27 500 vs USD 9000.

Really ? I have difficulty believe in 3 times . You have a source ?

Drc40 7th May 2020 16:42


Originally Posted by ATC Watcher (Post 10775497)
Really ? I have difficulty believe in 3 times . You have a source ?

It’s not 3 times, at least if you believe this apparently detailed analysis. Just giving it a quick gander shows maybe 30% but this is all based on cost per pax/mile. Not sure how to extrapolate that to cargo, conversion costs, etc.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...00936119301244

ThorMos 8th May 2020 08:08


Originally Posted by Drc40 (Post 10775569)
It’s not 3 times, at least if you believe this apparently detailed analysis. Just giving it a quick gander shows maybe 30% but this is all based on cost per pax/mile. Not sure how to extrapolate that to cargo, conversion costs, etc.
<snip>

What i read from this document is that using two smaller planes compared to one bigger one, the cost is about 40-50% higher.

For instance: Long haul, standard seat arrangement, 450 pax,
A380: roughly 13,5ct/n mile-pax
B767-300 (@225 pax): roughly 12ct/n mile-pax
So it's 13,5c compared to 24ct. <------ Edit: wrong!!!

Please correct me if i am wrong...

Edit: yes, i was wrong. shouldn't multiply by two as cost is 'per pax'.

procede 8th May 2020 09:32


Originally Posted by ThorMos (Post 10776056)
Please correct me if i am wrong...

It is per pax, so you should not multiply it by 2. So per pax km the 767-300 is cheaper. So two 767's would be ~10% more cost efficient.
What isn't in this equation is the availability of slots. So can you operate two flights?
Also and for freight, the A380 can probably offer a lot more volume. So for low density freight, per m3 km, the A380 might still be more efficient.

Anti Skid On 8th May 2020 10:09


Originally Posted by procede (Post 10776132)
It is per pax, so you should not multiply it by 2. So per pax km the 767-300 is cheaper. So two 767's would be ~10% more cost efficient.
What isn't in this equation is the availability of slots. So can you operate two flights?
Also and for freight, the A380 can probably offer a lot more volume. So for low density freight, per m3 km, the A380 might still be more efficient.

Is the 12c per km inclusive of nav charges, landing fees, parking, etc?

procede 8th May 2020 10:17


Originally Posted by Anti Skid On (Post 10776171)
Is the 12c per km inclusive of nav charges, landing fees, parking, etc?

All of those are related to maximum take off weight (MTOW), so they generally scale with size. Landing fees often have a minimum MTOW threshold at large airports. Nav charges in Europe use the square root of the MTOW.

So basically, the A380 will generally only have a very small advantage in these costs.

ThorMos 8th May 2020 12:03


Originally Posted by procede (Post 10776132)
It is per pax, so you should not multiply it by 2. So per pax km the 767-300 is cheaper. So two 767's would be ~10% more cost efficient.
What isn't in this equation is the availability of slots. So can you operate two flights?
Also and for freight, the A380 can probably offer a lot more volume. So for low density freight, per m3 km, the A380 might still be more efficient.

Yes, of course, thank you. Sorry for this.

White Knight 8th May 2020 12:17


Originally Posted by procede
So basically, the A380 will generally only have a very small advantage in these costs.

Which is why many of the EK 380s have an MTOW of 510 tonnes and not the higher 569 or 575 tonne limit...

Longtimer 9th May 2020 18:45

Any one with pictures of the conversions?

Following is a goto to an article on possible freighter:

A380 Freighter Might Be More Trouble Than It’s Worth For COVID-19 Air Cargo

https://www.forbes.com/sites/willhor.../#4bc3722f75df


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:04.


Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.