Re: MD-17 vs. MD-11F/DC-10F

Date:         01 Jan 97 20:59:21 
From:         mba340@club-internet.fr (Ben)
Organization: mail.club-internet.fr
References:   1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Followups:    1
Next article
View raw article
  or MIME structure

kls@ohare.Chicago.COM (Karl Swartz) wrote:

>>CARGOLUX which used 747 400F said that they have lot of difficulties
>>to rentabilised this aircraft.

>I read an article about the 747-400F a while back.  It's main benefit
>compared to the 747-200F is greater range with a full cargo load.  For
>many interesting cargo routes, however, it's range isn't enough more
>to eliminate fuel stops.  I think SFO-NRT was an example.  Both planes
>need a fuel stop, usually at ANC.  The fact that the -400F could fly a
>greater percentage of the flight before stopping is neither interesting
>nor useful.  With a plentiful supply of inexpensive -200s which can be
>converted to freighters, the -400F was claimed to be a fairly difficult
>sell.

It's not a range problem. But the initial cost is higher than a
modification of a 747 200.
CARGOLUX has to fly more and his market has small potential.
Airbus makes a study under the potential of new aircraft vs  second
hand one. The conclusion is that for high capacity (B747), the return
on investment is better wirh a second hand one.