Airbus has discovered that success in the airliner business does not necessarily translate to success in the airline business. The planemaker shut down its oversized cargo carrier Beluga last week after just 14 months in operation. And the reason cited for the sudden closure? It's too hard, according to the company that built a 600-seat two storey airliner. "AiBT is not ending operations because of changes in the air freight market," a spokeswoman told AFP. "The main challenge was the significant operational difficulties."
Some great ideas just don’t scale-up economically. I have a friend who, back in the 20-teens, flew left-seat in Global Supertankers: B747-400s gutted and crammed with liquid tanks and high-pressure pumps. The beast was capable of delivering nearly 20,000 gallons of pressurized water/retardant on wildfires, in one pass. It could be on station almost anywhere in the world in 20 hours. Sadly, the owner (Evergreen) had financial problems and reverted and sold their last 747 in 2021. Sure could use one in California these days
Had over 400 staff for those four aircraft. French media said the problem was the height of the cargo space did not lend its-self to modern air-freight containers, and flying containers is where the every day bread and butter comes from.
At the start Airbus thought the market would change with more odd-shaped things being flown, and that did not happen.
I wonder how the payload capacity of the Beluga compares to the AN-124. The AN-124s seem to do reasonable business flying large and outsized cargo around. However, the AN-124 has ground level ramps and self-loading/unloading equipment. The Beluga needs special loading and unloading equipment.
Beluga is probably cheaper to operate though.
c180tom
(Tom Jensen (please don't post, I get confused with a detective on the Green River Killerf)
7
ssobol, great question about the AN-124. Used to see them at KSEA and KPAE. I first saw one at the 1st international air in the southern hemisphere at RAAF Richmond in Australia.