Notices

A350s

Old 06-23-2021, 09:01 AM
  #11  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Posts: 575
Default

I agree, 330/321.

A lot of used 330 sitting around. 321 only thing close to the 757 in volume and weight.

777F too expensive off the production line to have 100. Eitad sent out press release they are getting rid of all their 777 which I assume includes the four remaining freighters. Best guess we have our bid on them.

I expect after results released for 21’ tomorrow we will learn a lot more. I think they will increase the 767 purchase too.
max8222 is offline  
Old 06-23-2021, 09:55 AM
  #12  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Mar 2012
Position: Two Wheeler FrontSeat
Posts: 1,162
Default

Originally Posted by OKLATEX View Post
BC (Before COVID) I heard the rumor that A330s/A321s had been approved by the BOD as a fleet renewal for the MD-11/757.

I could see the A321s being a good 757 replacement as the bellies are containerized as opposed to bulk loading the 757. Takes a LONG time to bulk load a 757 Belly.

Have a hard time believe the company would want to add another Airbus fleet to replace the MDs though, whether it is the A330 or A350. The 777X Freighter (Based on the 777-8) is being pitched to QATAR as they looking at a fleet renewal. I believe for both the A350 and 777X they would enter into service in 2025. Why would we add the complexity and cost of an additional fleet, specially one that flies International routes? Of course FDX like all airlines loves a good deal. Further, wingspan lengths are always an issue with us. I haven’t looked at the 777X, but folding wing tips would seem to address/help that issue.

A bit amusing. Delta guys seem to think an A350 order is coming and the UPS guys are talking about it as well with there CEO talking of a fleet renewal for their MDs.

They may also want to please the European leaders where we have been growing and look to expand even more. You gotta try to make everybody happy.
StarClipper is offline  
Old 06-24-2021, 10:03 AM
  #13  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Dec 2018
Posts: 247
Default

777XF would be awesome but it’s not going to fit into a lot of gates. The 330 and 350 both have that problem too with longer modern wings. I think that’s going to be the real issue.

Having flown the 319/320/321 CEO I definitely agree with previous comments that the performance of the 321 is terrible. I think the whole family has the same wing, so the 321 wing is loaded up making it sluggish in a climb and barely allows speed brakes while clean below 250 KIAS.

My guess is that FedEx is probably waiting to see what happens with the 797/NMA project to assess whether they’ll talk about the eventual 757 replacement with Boeing or Airbus.

Airbus has patented folding wings, so if they offered an A330NEO freighter or A350F with folding wings, then it would solve a the gate space issue.
WearyEyed is offline  
Old 06-24-2021, 10:38 AM
  #14  
Gets Weekends Off
 
trashhauler's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: B-777
Posts: 455
Default

Originally Posted by WearyEyed View Post
777XF would be awesome but it’s not going to fit into a lot of gates. The 330 and 350 both have that problem too with longer modern wings. I think that’s going to be the real issue.

Having flown the 319/320/321 CEO I definitely agree with previous comments that the performance of the 321 is terrible. I think the whole family has the same wing, so the 321 wing is loaded up making it sluggish in a climb and barely allows speed brakes while clean below 250 KIAS.

My guess is that FedEx is probably waiting to see what happens with the 797/NMA project to assess whether they’ll talk about the eventual 757 replacement with Boeing or Airbus.

Airbus has patented folding wings, so if they offered an A330NEO freighter or A350F with folding wings, then it would solve a the gate space issue.
Folding wingtips are a first for commercial aviation. To stay within the size category of the current 777 with a less than 213 ft (65 m) wingspan, it features 11 feet (3.5 m) folding wingtips with the folding wingtip actuation system made by Liebherr Aerospace.
trashhauler is offline  
Old 06-24-2021, 01:50 PM
  #15  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Dec 2018
Posts: 247
Default

Originally Posted by trashhauler View Post
Folding wingtips are a first for commercial aviation. To stay within the size category of the current 777 with a less than 213 ft (65 m) wingspan, it features 11 feet (3.5 m) folding wingtips with the folding wingtip actuation system made by Liebherr Aerospace.
Folding wings are probably going to be more common going forward. Both models of the 777x have a wingspan of 235’5”, but with the wingtips folded up that decreases to 212’9”, which matches the 777F.

The 777F is 209’ in length but the 777-8 is 229’ and the 777-9 is 251’9” and I think that’s the issue for us.It’s basically crew bus rumor, but I’ve heard our gates can’t accommodate the added length of the 777x.
WearyEyed is offline  
Old 06-24-2021, 02:27 PM
  #16  
Gets Weekends Off
 
The Walrus's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2010
Position: Socket Drawer
Posts: 1,797
Default

That's what She said.
The Walrus is offline  
Old 06-24-2021, 04:20 PM
  #17  
Line Holder
 
Joined APC: Dec 2016
Posts: 96
Default Wingspans and ramp space

Gates 556-558, 3 gates. Used to be 4 gates on that row. They had to get rid of the fourth and re-paint to make spots wide enough for 777 wingspans.

Any plane with a wingspan greater than 180ft would probably cause major issues for ramp.

just think, if there are 57 MD11s, and you want to replace them with something that has a 212ft wingspan, you’ll lose 15 parking spots. In addition to that, there are potential depth issues and problems with tails hanging over lines as well.

even taxi lanes pose an issue with a 212ft span. Can’t use gates on Southeast ramp, northeast ramp. East ramp due to taxi lane width. And Taxi lanes 700/800/900 and Democrat ramp might be a stretch too.

767-400, ie, 767XF, is same length as MD11, same wingspan. Same payload capability as the MD11. Just can’t fly 10+ hours but can still do trans-Atlantic with a full payload. Same type as the 767-300F. Fleet commonality.

Guess we’ll wait and see if Boeing will do it. Time will tell, interesting dilemma for the company.
Reese is offline  
Old 06-24-2021, 04:31 PM
  #18  
Gets Weekends Off
 
MEMA300's Avatar
 
Joined APC: May 2006
Position: Excessed WB Capt.
Posts: 1,058
Default

Originally Posted by Reese View Post
Gates 556-558, 3 gates. Used to be 4 gates on that row. They had to get rid of the fourth and re-paint to make spots wide enough for 777 wingspans.

Any plane with a wingspan greater than 180ft would probably cause major issues for ramp.

just think, if there are 57 MD11s, and you want to replace them with something that has a 212ft wingspan, you’ll lose 15 parking spots. In addition to that, there are potential depth issues and problems with tails hanging over lines as well.

even taxi lanes pose an issue with a 212ft span. Can’t use gates on Southeast ramp, northeast ramp. East ramp due to taxi lane width. And Taxi lanes 700/800/900 and Democrat ramp might be a stretch too.

767-400, ie, 767XF, is same length as MD11, same wingspan. Same payload capability as the MD11. Just can’t fly 10+ hours but can still do trans-Atlantic with a full payload. Same type as the 767-300F. Fleet commonality.

Guess we’ll wait and see if Boeing will do it. Time will tell, interesting dilemma for the company.
wait is there a 767XF in the works?
MEMA300 is offline  
Old 06-24-2021, 05:28 PM
  #19  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Mar 2021
Posts: 166
Default

Originally Posted by Reese View Post
Gates 556-558, 3 gates. Used to be 4 gates on that row. They had to get rid of the fourth and re-paint to make spots wide enough for 777 wingspans.

Any plane with a wingspan greater than 180ft would probably cause major issues for ramp.

just think, if there are 57 MD11s, and you want to replace them with something that has a 212ft wingspan, you’ll lose 15 parking spots. In addition to that, there are potential depth issues and problems with tails hanging over lines as well.

even taxi lanes pose an issue with a 212ft span. Can’t use gates on Southeast ramp, northeast ramp. East ramp due to taxi lane width. And Taxi lanes 700/800/900 and Democrat ramp might be a stretch too.

767-400, ie, 767XF, is same length as MD11, same wingspan. Same payload capability as the MD11. Just can’t fly 10+ hours but can still do trans-Atlantic with a full payload. Same type as the 767-300F. Fleet commonality.

Guess we’ll wait and see if Boeing will do it. Time will tell, interesting dilemma for the company.
Or open/expand more bases = problem solved.
Jamo is offline  
Old 06-24-2021, 06:28 PM
  #20  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Dec 2018
Posts: 247
Default

Originally Posted by MEMA300 View Post
wait is there a 767XF in the works?
Rumor have swirled that it’s been considered. I think I read that it was a 767-400 with a longer landing gear to accommodate the GEnx engines that are on the 787. Essentially a 767 Max, so I doubt they’d make it due to the recent problems of slapping a bigger engine on an old pig.
WearyEyed is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
leeaf7
Delta
4
04-10-2020 12:14 PM
firstmob
Delta
27
02-19-2020 07:43 PM
sailingfun
Delta
344
02-26-2019 08:43 PM
vagabond
Technical
0
03-15-2007 09:43 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Your Privacy Choices