FUTURE AIR CARGO AIRCRAFT Chapter 3
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Chapter 3 FUTURE AIR CARGO AIRCRAFT Chapter 3 FUTURE AIR CARGO AIRCRAFT —.— .— Almost all commercial all-cargo aircraft cur- 1. as a derivative of a new or existing rently in the fleet are derivatives or conversions passenger or military airplane; of passenger aircraft. Some civilian and military 2. development of a dedicated civilian cargo planners, as well as some all-cargo operators, aircraft designed without regard for either have argued that the growth of the industry has passenger or military requirements; and been hampered by the lack of aircraft optimized 3. development of a joint civil-military air to fulfill cargo carrying requirements. cargo plane that would satisfy both com- mercial and military requirements. Three alternative approaches to the develop- ment of future all-cargo aircraft have been iden- Each of these alternatives will be discussed in tified: turn. FREIGHTERS DERIVED FROM PASSENGER AIRCRAFT In 1963, freighter service was available only Both aircraft could carry 13 pallets of 88 by 125 with propeller aircraft: about 75 percent piston inches, the standard units at that time. aircraft (primarily the DC-7) and 25 percent tur- The B-747 freighter comes closest to being a boprops (such as the CL-44). By 1970, almost 98 dedicated or uncompromised freighter design for percent of scheduled freighter service was of- commercial operations. When Boeing lost the fered with jet aircraft: 55 percent with the competition for the military cargo C-5A con- B-707-300 B/C, 22 percent with the DC-8-63F, tract to Lockheed in 1965, Boeing took its 11 percent with the DC-8-50F, and 10 percent with the B-727-1OO C/QC. assembled C-5A design team, added personnel from their commercial program, and set out to The fleet average operating cost declined from design an aircraft to meet the perceived needs of $0.30 per revenue ton-mile in 1963 to $0.16 in the rapidly growing commercial market. The re- 1967 and then began to increase, reaching $0.27 sulting B-747 was designed as a passenger plane. in 1977 (current dollars). Total operating costs However, because it appeared at that time that a have been steadily rising since 1973 because of supersonic transport (SST) would be a strong general inflation as well as the abrupt increase in competitor, the 747 was also designed to be an the price of fuel. Although the introduction of efficient freighter in the event that the SST took the B-747 in domestic service did produce lower over the passenger market. cost freighter service, the small number of The 747 was designed to hold two 8 by 8 ft B-747s relative to the B-707s and DC-8s has not containers abreast. This was the origin of the yet changed the fleet average cost curve. B-747s wide body, which at the time had little to do have found much greater use in international with passenger appeal. 1 The requirement that cargo operations than they have in domestic cargo be loaded through the nose of the aircraft operations. forced the cockpit to be placed at the upper Both the B-707 and the DC-8 were designed as Aviation Deueiopmeut: Ot~e Compan s passenger aircraft, with the fuselage cross-sec- ‘John E. Steiner, ]et y P~mp~ctizw, prepared by Boeing Commercial Aircraft Co. (Wash- tion being determined by the requirements of ington, D. C.: National Air and Space Museum, Smithsonian In- six-abreast seating and the width of the aisle. stitution, October 1979), pp. 15-18. 21 deck. Aerodynamic considerations required the stretched. Finally, Boeing is planning a freighter designers to allow a door height of only 8 feet, 2 version of the B-767 aircraft.3 inches—resulting in only a 2-inch clearance for For the light-payload category of freight- containers. ers—under 60,000 lb—Lockheed is considering marketing a potential derivative of its Hercules Because the SST did not materialize as a com- L-1OO, Dash sO. Current proposals include a petitor, the first 747 freighter was not delivered stretch of up to 45 ft over the basic model, which until 1972, more than 2 years later than the first would provide capability for transporting up to passenger version. Since then, however, prog- eight 8 by 8 by 10 ft containers with payload ress has been rapid, with a total of 129,747 2 ranging from 54,000 to 72,000 lb. This aircraft freighters delivered by December 1980. could replace the B-707-320C and the DC-8F on a number of routes and also have the capability Manufacturers are currently considering a (because of being able to handle the 8 by 8 ft number of variations on their existing aircraft. containers) to be an intermodal feeder freighter In the large-payload category, Boeing is con- for carriers using the B-747F. Other advantages sidering stretching its B-747-200F up to 50 ft, include lower fuel cost and straight-in, straight- resulting in 30 percent additional containerized out loading. The Dash so would be appropriate volume. In the medium-payload category-de- for short- to medium-range hauls—l,400 statute rivative aircraft would include the L-1011-500F, miles with a payload of 66,000 lb and 1,960 the DC-1 OF, and the B767F. Douglas’ DC-1OF miles with a payload of 50,000 lb. Derivatives of could be stretched and offered in a “combi” ver- the present B-727 and B-737 may also be possi- sion. Boeing’s B-707-320C could conceivably be ble.’ — 3Steiner, op. cit., 167-168. ‘Boeing Aircraft Co., telephone interview, July 14, 1981. ‘Ibid. Ch. 3—Future Air Cargo Aircraft ● 23 —— ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF DERIVATIVE AIRCRAFT Existing air cargo derivatives of passenger before production (as compared to all new air- airplanes have proven very satisfactory. For ex- craft). ample, the B-747-200F has proven to be the large A major disadvantage of existing air cargo air- payload workhorse of the air cargo fleet and craft is that they represent 1960’s technology and could continue unmodified for a number of that, therefore, their direct operating costs are years. higher than what might be achieved with present Any derivative freighter has the advantage of technology. Additionally, since they generally having most of its development costs already have not been designed specifically for air cargo, charged against the sale of its passenger counter- loading and unloading can present problems; the part. In addition, the financial arrangements for aircraft may be pressurized more than neces- purchasing the airplane have already been estab- sary, and there may be equipment built in for lished and there is a relatively short lead time passenger safety that is unneeded for cargo. DEDICATED AIR FREIGHTERS A dedicated commercial air freighter is an could be commercially viable and could become airplane which has been designed from the operational in 1985. Results suggested a prefer- ground up as a freighter, with no constraints im- ence for a short- and a long-range version, each posed by either passenger or military require- with a payload of about 330,000 lb. G At com- ments. Over the years, there has been a debate parable payloads, these cargo aircraft were concerning the cost effectiveness of such an estimated to provide a 20 percent reduction in airplane, with some all-cargo carriers claiming trip cost and a 15 percent decrease in aircraft that they could consistently earn a profit if they price compared to current wide bodies in in- had such an aircraft. To help resolve this contro- flated 1984 dollars, ’ Douglas estimated there versy, the National Aeronautics and Space Ad- could be 400 such derivatives produced by ministration (NASA) selected two contractors, 1998.8 Douglas Aircraft Co. and Lockheed-Georgia A long- and a short-range dedicated freighter Co., to independently evaluate the feasibility of were then hypothesized to be introduced in 1994 producing such a freighter by 1990. This was using 1990 technology (an unrealistically short done as part of the Cargo/Logistics Airlift development time according to some experts). Systems Study (CLASS). ’ The 1990 technology assumed was derived from Douglas made several forecasts of the future NASA’s Aircraft Energy Efficiency (ACEE) pro- fleet composition given various developments. gram, which seeks to develop a variety of Their analysis indicated that two new cargo air- technologies leading to fuel savings and lower craft could be derived from existing wide body operating costs for future passenger aircraft. aircraft using 1980 technology. These aircraft Some of the new technologies include: 1) com- —— posite materials, which reduce weights and pro- ‘See: McDonnell Douglas Corp., Douglas Aircraft Co., Cargo Logistics Airlift Systems Study (CLASS), 4 vols,, prepared by R. J. vide higher strengths; 2) active controls, which Burby and W. H. Kuhlman, under NASA contract No. NASl- provide automatic response to flight and gust 14948 (Hampton, Va.: Langley Research Center, National Aero- conditions; and 3) advanced engine technology, nautics and Space Administration, October 1978). (Hereafter cited as “Douglas, CLASS.”) See also: Lockheed-Georgia Co., with higher thrust to weight ratios and better Cargo ‘Logistics Airlift Systems Study (CLASS) 2 vols., prepared specific fuel consumption. by J. M. Norman, R. D. Henderson, F. C. Macey, and R. P. —. —.—— Tuttle, under NASA contract No. NASA-14967 (Hampton, Va.: ‘Douglas, CLASS Volume -? F//tur~~ 1<~’(l~{tr~~t)l[~~lts c)f DL~dIcL~t(~Li Langley Research Center, National Aeronautics and Space Admin- Freighter Aircraft to Year 2008 pp. xxiv-xxv. istration, November 1978). (Hereafter cited as “Lockheed, ‘Ibid., p. xxv. CLASS.”) ‘Ibid., p. xxvii.