HPRamper wrote:

seabosdca wrote:

HPRamper wrote:

Simply put, the idea that the A330F is ideal to replace the MD-10/11 is not true as it pertains specifically to FedEx. It would ring true more from a dedicated bulk cargo carrier viewpoint but the way FedEx containerizes (as opposed to palletizing) really makes a mess out of the translation.

So if the 772 conversion program never gets off the ground (either because of composite floors or for some other reason), what should the strategy be? Just keep the M11s going, hoping that partial engine commonality with 767s and 747s helps with engine maintenance and that airframe maintenance doesn't get too difficult? Move to A330 or more 767, change the airline's container strategy and try to mitigate the potential operational disruption you mentioned? Seems like a narrow spot.

It is a very narrow spot, but all indications right now point to yes, for the time being. The current replacement plans address the MD10s and to a lesser extent the Airbus. Only a handful of 11s slated to be parked anytime soon. The plan is to keep them going for the time being. It's not enviable. Personally I think their solution will be to use the 767 and 757 (and later, the 757 replacement) domestically and on intra-Europe and intra-Asia routes, with some 777s on the heaviest lanes (MEM-LAX/PHX/SEA/etc) and just up the frequency overall. Move the AMJ containers to the 777 bases and everywhere else transitions to AAD.

I saw another A310 get parked this week. No MD-10s for a while though. Is FX still planning on putting any more 10s through a heavy check? How much longer for the MD-10-10? Engines must be interesting to keep up on with FX the only operator of its oddball version of CF-6.

Stitch wrote:

brindabella wrote:

would the (in)famous 777 "folding wingtip" do the trick?

Boeing engineered that out of the "777 Classic" around the 150th frame and the Longer Range 777 family (which includes the 777 Freighter) had no design provision for it so it is not physically possible.

Ah ha!


So if some creative soul figures-out a 777-200A/300A conversion to make an economical 777ABCF and implements the folding wingtip? ...




cheers

Not mentioned is 744P2F conversions, with the 777 floor beam issues wouldn't it be more economic to convert 744's. As noted a lot of the 11's routes are lo utilization. Are the 744's just too big now.

Spacepope wrote:

I saw another A310 get parked this week. No MD-10s for a while though. Is FX still planning on putting any more 10s through a heavy check? How much longer for the MD-10-10? Engines must be interesting to keep up on with FX the only operator of its oddball version of CF-6.

I see that too, now that you mention it. Somehow they are finding a way to use four planes to five ramps every week. That's some juggling there. And I know for sure we've just gotten some 10s back from C check and repaint, as for the future schedule I'm not privy to that information, perhaps wrenchon or fixinthe757 know more on the subject.

JayinKitsap wrote:

Not mentioned is 744P2F conversions, with the 777 floor beam issues wouldn't it be more economic to convert 744's. As noted a lot of the 11's routes are lo utilization. Are the 744's just too big now.

The 744 is way too big, too much airplane for the mission and also would be a downgrade in fuel efficiency when FedEx is trying to get more fuel efficient.

FX planned to add these aircraft, not necessarily use them to replace current aircraft, correct me if I am wrong?

United_fan wrote:

aemoreira1981 wrote:

FedEx really wants to simplify its fleet to 3 types. Might they consider the B737-800BCF?

The 757's aren't getting any younger,and were used when FX got them.

I was part of the crew that converted the 757s here in Mobile. Theyre not going anywhere for a long time. Still lots of hours/cycles left on them for many years to come. They wouldn't have bought them if that weren't the case. FedEx is also going to update the cockpit (once again) to the 767 new cockpit once everything gets approved. Further case theyre going nowhere for a long time

Veigar wrote:

FX planned to add these aircraft, not necessarily use them to replace current aircraft, correct me if I am wrong?

Sort of. The jury is kind of still out on that.

A few years back, the company went gung-ho on retiring a bunch of the MD10s. Freight had not yet returned after the recession (freight lags a bit behind) and so the company saw a great opportunity to park some of the planes for good. Well, in the middle of that process freight started coming back like gangbusters. Suddenly FX didn't have enough planes and freight was being left in the field.

Around the same time frame FX was making that big initial order for the 767, ostensibly to replace the MD10 fleet. However, by the time deliveries began FX needed that lift to supplement the MD10s instead of replacing them. Up until now - FX has 55 active 767s - only a very few additional MD10s have been retired since that wave a few years ago. Yes the original plan was for the 767 to replace the MD10s almost one-for-one, it hasn't worked out that way. However, that's still the official mission and I believe FX is nearing or back to the point where they can get back to that pattern. They are taking 1-2 new 767s each month plus 3ish 777s per year right now.

McDonnell Douglas DC/MD10 MSN 32 N372 Fedex Ferried 29 June MEM-VCV for storage.
The DC 10's are reducing

KLM747er wrote:

McDonnell Douglas DC/MD10 MSN 32 N372 Fedex Ferried 29 June MEM-VCV for storage.
The DC 10's are reducing

Down to 24 10-10 and 13 10-30. Up to 57 767s in service now.

janders wrote:

Good. Congrats Boeing and Fedex.

What happens to the 777 freighters when 777X line is in full swing?

Nothing. They are manufactured on the same line interchangeably. Perhaps FX can get good deals on certain production slots to help Boeing keep up production rates.

iahcsr wrote:

Bricktop wrote:

Newbiepilot wrote:

. I still wish that UA had ordered more 767s.

UA tried, but Boeing couldn’t make it happen (most likely for the right price)

I don't think the vendors for the passenger only parts were willing to make the parts for the prices UA was willing to pay. After Boeing announced they wouldn't produce more passenger 767's, they announced the 787-8 would be built with more commonality with the 787-9 and 787-10. This could cut the cost and weight of 787-8's and allow Boeing to be more aggressive on pricing. The 787-8 has about the same capacity as the 767-400. If Boeing offered 787-8's to replace older 763's plus the chance to be the launch customer for the MOM, UA could replace older 763's with aircraft with new cabins, then take new Boeing MOM's when they become available to replace transatlantic 757's.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes ... ogram/amp/

While the article focuses on the KC-46, it shows what FEDEX and other operators have "bought into". The 767 program as a whole has a very long future ahead of it with improvements guaranteed. FEDEX also has a ready made pilot pool as the KC-46 replaces the KC-135. Plenty of the world's best pilots will flow out of the USAF/ANG right into FEDEX's 767s in an almost plug and play style.

jbs2886 wrote:

flyingclrs727 wrote:

iahcsr wrote:

UA tried, but Boeing couldn’t make it happen (most likely for the right price)

I don't think the vendors for the passenger only parts were willing to make the parts for the prices UA was willing to pay. After Boeing announced they wouldn't produce more passenger 767's, they announced the 787-8 would be built with more commonality with the 787-9 and 787-10. This could cut the cost and weight of 787-8's and allow Boeing to be more aggressive on pricing. The 787-8 has about the same capacity as the 767-400. If Boeing offered 787-8's to replace older 763's plus the chance to be the launch customer for the MOM, UA could replace older 763's with aircraft with new cabins, then take new Boeing MOM's when they become available to replace transatlantic 757's.

Its a great point that generally a 788 is similar to a 764 capacity-wise. But, I think it is notable that the capacity on aircraft is changing with new seating arrangements; mainly, premium economy and the Polaris seats. These both take a lot of space compared to what they replace (assuming no F seats). As such, I think UA will make a new 788 closer in capacity to a 763 than the current 764.

Well also the 764's are also likely to be reconfigured with Polaris too eventually. In general the 764 and 788 have similar floor area and could be easily substituted for each other on east coast to Europe routes. Later as MOM's come into the fleet, 788's could be redeployed to other routes.