John Francis wrote: >On Sun, Jul 09, 2006 at 12:40:13PM -0400, Adam Maas wrote: > > >>Don Williams wrote: >> >> >> >>>I've been watching this thread for a while and can no longer be silent. >>>This is the biggest load of bullshit I've seen in ages. I just did two >>>calculations for 4000 kgs and 2000 kgs of cartons (holding about twenty >>>cameras each) across the Atlantic from Toivakka to New York -- door to >>>door. >>> >>>The TNT Air Freight cost would be 22.97 Euro per kilogram for a shipment >>>of boxes that total 4000 kgs. If anyone doesn't believe this go to the >>>TNT website and do the calculation yourself. I think 4000 kgs is a large >>>quantity. Yes? Or is the poster (I can't remember who posted the >>>original rubbish) going to say 4000 kgs is not a large enough quantity. >>>By the way *the more you send* the cheaper it gets! >>> >>>Don >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>I said large quantities, and I meant it. I'm talking by the multiple >>containerload. 747-400F's are relatively cheap to operate, the larger >>freight aircraft aren't so cheap, and are rather limited availability >>(which drives up the price). >> >> > >They're still cheaper to operate than passenger aircraft, pound for pound. >Passengers demand expensive, heavy, support equipment (seats, crew, etc.) >And if any one of a dozen airlines can ship me and my luggage across the >Atlantic (business class) at a cost well under $100/lb round trip, and make >money when the plane is loaded to less than half capacity, there is simply >no way it costs orders of magnitude more to ship air freight. > >
Other way around actually. Passenger Aircraft are cheaper to operate, and longer ranged. Take the Passenger and Freight versions of the 747-400ER. The Passenger version can move between 416 and 524 passengers depending on configuration, plus 4800-5600 cu ft of freight/baggage(Based on passenger configuration) 14,205km in one go. The Freighter version can move 112 tons, with a aggregate total of 31,967 cu ft of space (less for palletized cargo, which is the typical method of shipment) but only has a range of 9200km, or it can carry 123 tons of a similar sized cargo for greatly reduced range. It does use approximately 6500 gallons less fuel in a max range flight, but that's 10% or so less fuel to go more than 30% less far (Freighter has 57,285 US gallons capacity to the 63,705 gallons the passenger version carries) . And fuel is the primary operating cost for aircraft. So you've got at a minimum a 30% efficiency advantage here, and quite possibly more (Due to palletization, which costs max load and size in favour of significantly enhanced speed). Note that most small air freight goes via passenger aircraft, one reason why it's much cheaper. >Perhaps you confused price per tonne with price per kg? > > Possible, I don't have the reference I was using handy. > >Another point to consider: FedEx ship air freight across the country >(using their own dedicated L1011s and other similar aircraft). I assume >they make money on the deal - they've been doing this for many years now - >and they sure don't charge anywhere near what you've been suggesting. > > > > Of course not, they're barely going 3000 miles and typically far less, instead of 2-3x times that, with much more cargo per lb of fuel since they are using aircraft with intercontinental range, allowing much less than max fuel loads at Maximum Takeoff Weight. I'd be shocked if their cost was even $5/lb for short ranges (Note the same goes for air freight from South America, which, while higher cost than within the US proper, isn't going to approach the cost of flying Japan-US by even a close margin). -Adam -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
