This is Airsider.

August 2005

Boeing Airbus mega freighter battle

Airbus has rebutted a stinging attack on the freighter version of its A380 by Boeing, which claims that an advanced version of its 747 will be a much more efficient freighter. Payload Asia's John Spiers reports.

Airbus has rebutted a stinging attack on the freighter version of its A380 by Boeing, which claims that an advanced version of its 747 will be a much more efficient freighter.

Boeing vice president Randy Baseler said the proposed 747 Advanced F would carry a 139 tonne payload about 8100 km (about 4400 nmi) compared to the 112-tonne payload capability of the existing 747-400F.

It would use 787 all new technology engines and be stretched by 5.3 m (17.3 ft) providing 16 percent more revenue cargo volume including four additional main deck pallets, two additional lower hold pallets and two additional lower hold containers.

Notes from a recent briefing on various programmes by Baseler in Sydney contain the following statement:

“The A380 Makes A Poor Freighter. “Why does the A380 make a poor freighter? Let’s start with poor structural efficiency. Compared to 747-400ERF, for an additional 32 tonnes of payload, the A380 requires 92 tonnes of additional structure (operating empty weight), every day, for every trip.

“Compare it to the 747 Advanced Freighter and for an additional 10 tonnes payload, the A380 requires 74 tonnes of additional operating empty weight.

“The A380 freighter also has poor density capability as it is designed for lower density (7.9 lbs/cu. ft.) cargo versus the 747F average design density of 9.9 lbs/cu. ft.

“This might not sound like much except that a recent study of a dozen of the largest 747F operators representing over 200 flights revealed a market density of 9.5 lbs/cu. ft. worldwide.

“This means the A380 will hit its weight carrying capability limit at an 80 percent volume load factor. This can have a very limiting effect on revenue generation, particularly in this very directional market.”

The Boeing document said loading the A380 would be difficult and inefficient because of single doors for main/upper decks and incompatibility with industry standard, three-meter high pallets (747F/777F)

It said the A380 had three decks/three different load heights with extremely high loading of the upper deck, 8-meters above the ground and no oversize load capability “in addition to the multiple infrastructure challenges and costs an airplane of this size creates.”

“At market-density loads (9.5 lbs/cu. ft.), the A380F has no tonne-mile cost advantage over the 747-400F/ERF, but it will have 20 percent higher trip costs.

In contrast, the 747 Advanced F offers 10-15 percent ton-mile cost improvement over the A380 carrying an equivalent payload.”

When invited to respond to Boeing’s claims, an Airbus spokesman said they were based on exaggerated and incorrect weights for the A380.

“The A380 actually carries 34 tonnes more than the 747-400 Freighter, and it carries them 1400 nm further. In other words, A380 does not just carry more weight, it also carries it a lot further,” he said. Overall, A380 beats 747 Freighter in payload, range, volume and costs. A380 Freighter’s key benefit is 20 percent lower DOC/tonne than 747-400F.”

He said the A380 offered a range of design-densities (8.2 to 9.9), making it suitable for the carriage of many different kinds of freight, thanks to pallet layout flexibility.

“The 747F and 747AdvF have a high design density ONLY, which is NOT in line with market trends.
“Market trend is actually toward lower cargo densities, as more and more shipments include highvalue low-density items - such as computer chips and toys from China, where elaborate packaging drives density down.

“With low-density items, an airline becomes limited by the volume of the cargo that can be loaded, rather than its weight. With a greater volume - main-deck of the A380 is 12 in wider than 747 - the A380 beats the 747 easily).”

The Airbus spokesman said 10 ft high X 8 ft wide pallets could ONLY be carried by the 747 (and then NOT in all of its cargo hold positions), which means that they cannot be interlined with other aircraft. And 10ft height cannot be reached if you have really dense cargo!

“The 747F is unique in having the problem that, when using standard 8 ft pallets/containers, its tonne-mile cost shoots up (what counts on freighter economics is volume x density and not just structural payload. In this case the 747F flies a lot of air, at a cost but for no revenue).

“DC-10F, MD-11F, A300/A310F, 767F, and of course A380F, do not have the problem. Built-up pallets are thus widely used instead of 10 ft high ones and, where containers are used, they tend to be 8 ftX 8 ft ones - there are no 10 ft tall containers - both of which are easily and efficiently handled by the A380.”

The Airbus spokesman said there were not many outsize cargoes that could not be loaded into the A380, which had an extra-wide main-deck cargo door (34" wider than 747F main-deck cargo door).
“The nose-door of the 747 Freighter is of limited utility, as proven by success of converted 747s (- 100/-200/-300, and now -400, which are “selling” faster than new build ones).

“The nose door of 747 is costly in terms of extra space needed at airports, extra weight and additional maintenance. About a half of the world’s 747 Freighters do NOT have nose-doors - these are the converted ones, since if you buy a new factory-built 747 Freighter, it comes with a nose-door, whether you want it or not.

“The 747 was originally conceived as a freighter for the USAF and that when Boeing lost, to the Lockheed C-5A Galaxy, it took the losing design and turned it into a passenger airliner - which is why the 747 has a nose-door, and why the cockpit is perched on the top of the fuselage, where drag, cockpit-noise and visibility are at their worst.

“Lack of need for nose cargo-door was confirmed by dialogue with potential customers before launching the A380 Freighter.”

The Airbus spokesman said the value of the A380 Freighter was confirmed by the strong interest and orders that it had for it - entry into service was still three years away, in 2008.

“We have orders for 27 aircraft - 5 ILFC, 2 for Emirates, and 10 each for FedEx and UPS.”

Did you like this article? Let us know what you think about it! Click here

Copyright for texts and pictures: Payload Asia, Singapore. This report is brought to you in partnership with Payload Asia, the air cargo/express magazine for the Asia-Pacific and Middle East regions. To learn more about Payload Asia, please visit their website.