Fate of the Airbus A300's

[eolesen]

Why are the -622R's more popular freighter conversion candidates rather than the -605R's? I believe there are only 5 -605R's that were converted to freighters. If there is a reason for this, is this why no freight airlines are buying them?

-605's are CF6 powered, -622's are PW4000 powered. FDX operates both, but most airlines have a preference for one or the other.

124 -605Rs were built, with FDX accounting for approx a third of original deliveries, while 147 -622's were delivered.

Take out the FDX deliveries, and you have more -622's delivered, therefore more on the market for conversion.

 

[The Goose]

-605's are CF6 powered, -622's are PW4000 powered. FDX operates both, but most airlines have a preference for one or the other.

124 -605Rs were built, with FDX accounting for approx a third of original deliveries, while 147 -622's were delivered.

Take out the FDX deliveries, and you have more -622's delivered, therefore more on the market for conversion.

Aside from being overpowered hot-rods with the A5 engine (AMR), I never really understood the draw of the a-300/A-310 as a freighter. The airframe itself is far too rigid and develops beau coup cracks in the structure, more so than an aircraft designed to flex a bit. The 300s are far too rigid.

Load it up (as FedEx does), have a few hard landings, and then send to the structure shop for repairs

 

[eolesen]

Aside from being overpowered hot-rods with the A5 engine (AMR), I never really understood the draw of the a-300/A-310 as a freighter. The airframe itself is far too rigid and develops beau coup cracks in the structure, more so than an aircraft designed to flex a bit. The 300s are far too rigid.

Load it up (as FedEx does), have a few hard landings, and then send to the structure shop for repairs

FedEx does fly heavy freight, but anecdotally, I'm told they cube out well before reaching structural weights.

Not sure how much that's changed in the past 5-10 years, but historically, the majority of what they route by air is small to medium packages, e.g. documents, small electronics, time sensitive retail deliveries... That stuff can be bulky at times with all the protective packaging, but not particularly heavy. Likewise with UPS and DHL.

 

[Hopeful]

Whatever anyone's feeling is about the A300....since its retirement from AA, AA has had to make major operational changes to compensate for its pax and cargo capacity. That cargo belly alone was a money maker.
And to this day, using a 757 in its place to certain destinations is not an apt replacement at all.

 

[Life_Platinum]

Whatever anyone's feeling is about the A300....since its retirement from AA, AA has had to make major operational changes to compensate for its pax and cargo capacity. That cargo belly alone was a money maker.
And to this day, using a 757 in its place to certain destinations is not an apt replacement at all.

Here is a 4 part video entitle "Airbus Down" demonstrating how quickly one of AA's former airbuses (#55) was chopped up. Doug Scroggins, owner of the company doing the work, also has some shots of TWA's N610TW also being chopped up on his web site, with the cockpit going off to a museum. Even the food carts of #55 were part of recycling of the aircraft.

http://mojaveskies.blogspot.com/2009/03/victorville-report-airbus-down-part-iv.html