A well laid out case for the Boeing over the fat frenchie-- http://www.boeing.com/randy/

 

Boeing is a company that we can all be proud of for their accomplishments. And Randy’s journal has always been excellent reading.
Carrying weight is a consideration but carrying cubic volume is equally important. One item is missing from Randy’s journal is a comparison of volume for these aircraft. Some cargo containers cube out way before they reach their max container weight. Especially true when you are hauling say flowers for Valentine’s Day. Would like to see an aircraft comparison with the standard FedEx cube density in the containers.
At Farnborough in 2004, I witnessed the French being so blatant in their saber rattling that they were right, Boeing was wrong. Fast forward two years, and Boeing has the right formula now.
After seeing the A380 at Toulouse, one gets the impression that it is the size of an Ocean going Freight Liner (and will require Tony’s tug boat).
Again I am all for Boeing but hope to see the A380F successful because FedEx has an order for 10 with an option for 10 more. Somewhere it was stated that carrying freight in the A380F equates to carrying 10,000 Pax.
Seeing all that dirt being moved on Winchester Road for the A380F ramp in MEM is inspiring. That is if you are not a “disgruntled employee”. cub

 

A380 operational cost estimates seldom mention the cost of improvements in infrastructure necessary for the care, feeding and operation of the new Airbus. These are far in exceedence of what would be necessary for Boeing. Remember that even in the cargo configuration you still will have to deal with double decker cargo handling systems. I do not know how much of an impact this would be.

IMHO I am thinking that the capital improvements that would be necessary for the Airbus will probably far exceed what was necessary for the implementation of the 747 into the 1969-70 air transportation system.

 

And I suppose you can't wait to Fly the A380 at current book Widebody rates?

 

I don't think he is a line pilot. I think he flies on the corporate side. He is probably salivating over the chance to cross our picket line and fly as MD-11 Capt.

 

That Figures :

 

Not that I have the B-747, L1011 or DC-10 numbers in front of me, but I would imagine they were substantial. As were the switch from props to jets. After all, they required much longer runways, jetways, upgrades to atc etc,etc. With the switch from flying boats to wheel planes, LGA needed upgrades, with the changes from props to jets, JFK was neccesary. With the growth in passengers, Denver, Dallas etc all needed new airports.

Sure, there are cost involved, but such is a downside of progress I suppose.

 

How else can FedEx help defray the capital improvement costs if they don't double the productivly of its pilots.

 

I'm sure this is a repeat somewhere in here...

"If it ain't Boeing, I'm not going..."

 

Can you say "Cost Nuetral"...........Which is more precisely translated as concessionary to the Pilots!