|
MD-11F range?
Perusing Flightaware I have noticed that freight flights out of Anchorage (FDX/UPS/EVA/WORLD/SHANGHAI) are making 4500nm+ trips (ZSPD/VHHH/RCTP...etc) and I know that the MD-11F has some legs provided there is a cut in payload but does anyone have a rough idea numbers wise as to how much freight these aircraft are taking off with?
Thanks! |
Don't take it as gospel, it's from the interwbz afterall. But a bit of an interesting read on the MD11. It's just a copy-paste, so filter out the passenger stuff. And I'm sure some guys that have experience may be able to clarify/correct any inaccuracies;
When selecting a freighter, the operate looks for an aircraft with a very large spread between MLW (Max Landing Weight) and EW (Empty Weight). This is the amount of cargo that can be carried. Freight operators are looking for a large spread as a proportion of the EW, or how much dead weight you have to carry per pound of cargo. For large freight volumes, the MD11, DC10, 747F and even DC8 is very attractive in this regard. As it turns out, for most common cargo loads, the MD11/DC10 run out of lift and cargo capacity (volume) at about the same time. The 747's tend to run out of lift before they run out of volume. So a 777 or A330 or even 747 may be able to carry the cargo further, but the reality is that cargo does not mind if it takes 18 hours to cross the Pacific Ocean or 14 hours, and cargo does not mind what route it takes - passengers do and they need to be fed and entertained along the way. So for freight operations, carrying a larger amount of freight and less fuel, and then refueling enroute, can make for more efficient operations than long distance point to point operations. The other number that is of interest to freight operators is the ratio of fuel burn per hour / (MGTW-MLW). This is basically the range, and as long as this number is 5100 miles, it works well for freight ops. Remember that freights tend to operate between freight hubs, so the longer runs tend to be such as ANC-HKG or HNL-SYD. Look at the operations in/out of ANC and HNL each night and you will see how they operate as freight hubs. On the other hand, passengers operations require longer range non-stop services. Passengers don't want to stop in ANC or HNL for fuel between USA and Asia. So if we consider the operational numbers for a passenger MD11 flying, say LAX-HKG, we find EW=295,000 lb, MLW=440,000 lb, and MGTW=630,000 lb. Any flight that consumes more than 190,000 lb of fuel is converting payload into fuel at a rate of about 3lb/mile. LAX-HKG is about 15 hours much of the year (due to winds) and at about 16,000lb/hr fuel burn plus gound and climb usage (say another 15,000lb), we will consume about 255,000lb of fuel. Now subtract this 255,000lb fuel from MGTW and you get 375,000lb max landing weight, of which about 10,000lb will be fuel reserves. This leaves us a total of 70,000lb of usable payload for passengers, cabin amenities, luggage, catering etc. This means we have a severe passenger restriction for this flight. If you perform this same long-haul non-stop passenger service with a 747-400 (as CX does), you will consume about 330,000lb of fuel, and need about 12,000 reserves, so 875,000lb (MGTW) less 342,000lb fuel give us 533,000lb MLW against a EW of 398,000lb, or 135,000lb uplift capacity to work with instead of 70,000 lb for the MD11, which is a whole lot more realistic and viable. These numbers are much more attractive for the B777 and newer A340's for non-stop long haul passenger operations. Hence the demise of the MD11 as a passenger airliner, while it continues to be an admirable freighter. Now suppose I want to fly freight LAX-HGK non-stop. MLW of my MD11F = 480,000lb and EW = 265,000lb, while MGTW = 630,000lb. We are still going to consume 255,000lb of fuel and require 10,000lb fuel reserves, so I have 365,000lb MLW. Take away the EW and this gives me 100,000lb of cargo payload. However, what happens if I choose to give my cargo a break in ANC on the way? This will add about 200 miles to the flight, out of more than 7000 miles total, and of course we burn more fuel for the extra takeoff and landing, as well as about 2 hours additional time. LAX-ANC is about 2350 miles and will take about 5 hours, burning 90,000lb of fuel. Since this 90,000lb of fuel is way less than the spread of MLW and MGTW, this sector is limited only by max landing weight. That means my payload can be the entire spread between EW and MLW less the required fuel reserves, so I can carry about 206,000 lb of cargo. ANC-HKG is 5080 miles and against prevailing winds is likely to take about 11 hours, consuming about 175,000lb of fuel, plus 15,000lb for ground and climb out, plus 10,000 reserves, making fuel requirements about 200,000lb. This makes the payload 430,000-265,000=165,000lb (MGTW-InitialFuel-EW). So my two-hour fuel stop in ANC has increased my payload by 65%, while fuel costs rise about 10% and crew costs up slightly. But passengers would not appreciate the 2-hour fuel stop in ANC! Freight does not complain, and does not need toilet breaks etc. Freight operators like Fed-ex that get very good utilization out of their aircraft ensure that the operating cost efficiencies of their new MD11's (for freight ops as described above) outway the capital costs. For freight operators that have much lower aircraft utilisations, the capital costs are a more significant function and they will tend to look for less expensive purhcase costs and older DC10, B747, A300 and even DC8 aircraft fit their needs better. So MD11's make good freights so long as you don't try to fly them further than the spread between MGTW-MLW. 777 makes a great pax airline because passengers don't want to take an extra 2 hours to fly long-haul ops. |
Hmm if I understand this correctly the 2HR stop in ANC allows for a greater amount of freight to be uplifted onward to Asia?
|
Again, I don't have any personal experience.
But I'd venture to guess that ALA does the same thing for flights between Europe and Asia. |
Yeah that does make sense.....I'm sure some of the FDX/UPS guys and gals with jump in at some point...
|
Long read, but related to this thread
Wall Street Journal
Jennifer Levitz July 14, 2010 777s To Deliver An Edge... At a brainstorming session several years ago, FedEx Corp. Chairman and Chief Executive Frederick W. Smith and his counterpart at Boeing Co. used a napkin to sketch a cargo version of the aircraft maker's 777 passenger jet. Today Mr. Smith, who launched the overnight-delivery business when he founded FedEx in 1971, says the plane that emerged from those talks is crucial to his company's recovery from the recession. FedEx hopes to use its growing fleet of long-range 777s to win business from competitors like United Parcel Service Inc. in the lucrative market for international package delivery, and to cater to the rising middle classes in India, China, and Brazil, which Mr. Smith says increasingly want the latest product delivered to their door within a day or two. "It's quite a machine," the 66-year-old former Marine pilot says of the Boeing "triple seven," the largest, twin-engine plane on the market. "It's given us a whole new dimension into what we can do," he adds. The aircraft can carry 178,000 pounds at long distances and has a range of 6,675 miles, about 14,000 pounds and over 2,100 miles more than the MD-11, which has been Fed-Ex's chief long-haul freighter. FedEx, which won't disclose what it is paying for the planes, took delivery of its first six 777s in September, and expects to add six more to its fleet over the next 12 months. It plans to spend $3.2 billion overall on planes, new sorting centers, and other improvements in the fiscal year ending May 31, 2011, up from $2.8 billion a year earlier. The 777s are coming into service as FedEx and UPS are seeing new life in the overseas-shipping business. FedEx's international loads are at their highest since 2000, Mr. Smith says. Shipments by air are rising, as companies that slashed their inventories during the recession are scrambling to rebuild them and avoid leaving customers in the lurch. That's where the 777 comes in. The plane can fly between major cities in the U.S. and Asia without stopping to refuel in Anchorage, Alaska, where FedEx has a hub. Because they don't need to stop for fuel, the 777 can make the trip one to three hours faster than the MD-11. FedEx says the time savings allows it to give its Asian customers, who air-freight products ranging from electronics to toys to apparel, two extra hours a day to manufacture their goods and still get them shipped out for next-day delivery. The company calls the planes a "game changer. Its leading rival is skeptical of that claim. "We don't believe it's a game changer," says UPS spokesman Norman Black. "If we see any material change in competitive pick up times, we have ways of adjusting our own network to address that." Mr. Black says FedEx is spending more on new planes than is UPS, whose main long-haul freighters are the Boeing 747-400 and MD-11. FedEx and UPS play a huge role in global commerce, together carrying roughly 10% of the U.S. gross domestic product and 3.5% of global gross domestic product at any given time, based on their own estimates. That's why the two companies tend to be among the first to spot a downturn or turnaround. In the fiscal fourth quarter ended May 31, revenue from FedEx Express, which delivers world-wide by a definite date and hour, and accounts for the bulk of FedEx's revenue, grew by 23% after falling 24% a year earlier. FedEx added a ninth scheduled daily U.S.-Asia flight in April, and a third between Asia and Europe. Its average daily volume of packages shipped across the Atlantic or Pacific rose 23% in the quarter led by a 41% increase in exports from Asia, while the express unit's U.S. volume rose 1%. "That's why we have a relative degree of optimism, perhaps not shared by others. If they're just hooked into the local economy, they may not share that general optimism," Mr. Smith said. While he is generally upbeat about FedEx's global business, Mr. Smith is less enthusiastic about the U.S. economy, though he doesn't expect a double-dip recession. "I think the likelihood of that is low, but I think the greater likelihood is that the United States will have tepid growth," he says. Still, he is more confident than in December 2008, when said FedEx faced the worst economic conditions in its history. In response, FedEx lowered its cost structure, cutting $3 billion in expenses in fiscal years 2009 and 2010. "Pilots flew fewer flight hours, the mechanics had fewer hours, and pick up and delivery people, [sorters], and so forth," Mr. Smith says. Senior officers, including Mr. Smith, took pay cuts, and the company froze 401(k) matches. Since then, FedEx has restored some flight hours and retirement-plan benefits. Still, about $1.5 billion of the austerity measures remain in place, including Mr. Smith's pay cut. Even with global demand improving, Mr. Smith concedes that his company's investment in the new 777s is an aggressive one. By the end of fiscal 2016, the company plans to have 31 777s in its fleet. But he says, the new planes' fuel efficiency-they consume 18% less fuel than an MD-11-would be an advantage even if business turned lower. "If we're wrong, the only thing we have to do is put an MD-11 on the ground," he says. "The secret of this business is you've got to have a defensive strategy, as well as an offensive strategy." Wall Street Journal Jennifer Levitz July 14, 2010 |
^Apparently, freight does mind the two hour stop in ANC.
|
Originally Posted by cp44fla
(Post 1042624)
^Apparently, freight does mind the two hour stop in ANC.
Shippers of premium express freight do mind the extra 2 hours they have prior to the shipping cut-off point to the US, or so says Fed Ex. |
deleted.......
|
When a direct flight gives a later deadline for people shipping freight who pay for said freight to make it on time then the freight minds. But I can tell you've got to be right so......sure, the freight doesn't might.
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:08 AM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands