A Pound Of Feathers Or A Pound Of Gold?

A question I have is, why does the new technology aircraft just feature passenger service when the less inefficient aircraft become freighters? In this example, the 787's and A-350's are sold by the passenger trainload where the 767-300F and the A330F's are even being sold at all. Fed-Ex/UPS is building a freight fleet out of the 767's and almost no-one wants the A330-200F unless it's converted from its already built passenger status. There are several reasons for a freight business buying older technology airframes. To name a few below:

A 767 will profitably operate with its:

·      Its deadweight capacity 

·      Its space carrying volume

·      Seats removed

·      Service crew removed 

·      Cup holders tossed overboard

Passengers in this example are a pound of feathers requiring environment, supplies, and amenities so the most efficient 787 freight offering would become a wasteland of extravagance. The 767F has space and thrust for dead weight sans overhead bins. A pound of gold is what it needs to haul as a freighter, therefore, a 6,000-foot cabin pressure is not needed. Fuel costs on a 767 are its most deadweight it may carry on any particular trip which is factored into its freight bill of lading costs. The buy price of a 767 freighter must be significantly less than a passenger jet to make the whole scheme work well for the profit-minded.

Boeing's 767 offering for freight commerce seems to be the best choice at this time in the industry because it has space, thrust, and range charging the customer the appropriate amount for the fuel burn. Fuel economy is not listed above because dead weight doesn't complain much about fuel prices. The 767 purchase price is a bargain not requiring electronic window shades. The US military saw an opportunity to make it a freighter-fueler even when the A330 was bidding against it. The A330 was already sold as a military tanker at that time.

Cargo Facts Chart Below:

 

The freight business is becoming back in vogue as we write. Fed-ex and Amazon are the usual suspects with its respective movement of fleets with 767's. The A-380 was built for passengers and not freight. The A330 was built likewise engineered towards passenger service. Boeing always had a duopoly in mind with its aircraft as it built in tandem a 737, 747, and 767. Including those fabulous 777 freight versions. Only the 787 is not destined for the freight haul because it has a $30 billion deferred cost pit it can't climb out of until enough passenger models are delivered. 

A prediction may be coming for a 787F when its program debts are paid-off. However, Carbon Reinforced Plastic process is way too expensive for dead weight. The 767F has just got its freight legs in the meantime.