Why Didn't we see the A380F?

Here is a page to talk about why the A380F didn’t ever materialize. There are many contributing factors, and one of the chief reasons was because there wasn’t the demand for the aircraft. It would’ve cost Airbus millions to develop the aircraft and there was nearly no demand from airlines. Also, it would’ve been near impossible for airlines to fill an aircraft that big. The competition from the already established 747F was also too much. With the A380 production line closing soon, we will most likely never see the A380F.

3 Likes

There is a very simple reason. Well two.

  1. It would be waaaaaaaaaaaay to big.
  2. It would be waaaaaaaaaaaay to expensive.

It is also not very practical. We already have more efficient cargo aircraft that are just as big so there is really no need for it.

download%20(50)

10 Likes

And that is waaaaaaaaaaaay too many “a’s.” Calm yourself. But I can compromise, as your comment makes a statement of truth, in which I respect. Well said

8 Likes

It already is way to heavy on its own
Now with cargo that payload would be too much

1 Like

It would fall out of the sky.

2 Likes

Don’t think cargo 777’s for eg are heavier than passenger 777’s, but the point is is that bigger isn’t always better, the concept just isn’t practical

1 Like

Then why hasn’t the AN-225 done that yet? The AN-225 still exceeds (what would be) the A380F.

2 Likes

If you do some more research, there’s actually a bigger reason behind this aircraft never coming to life;

Around the time that Airbus had projected a freighter A380, the A380-800F (and an even longer version). There were to be 3 main launch customers; FedEx, TNT, and the last I assume being UPS, don’t quote me on it.

Around 2006, the production schedule should have been at full output, with the 15 large commitments on the A380, and then the 3 on the A380F.

However, this was around the time the entire programme was delayed severely by the Wiring issues that cropped up from using different software across nations.

At the point of 2007, the wiring issue had become a massive problem, and all existing A380s, and the ones being built, were put on standby so the wiring could be completely stripped and redone. The immediate response was to stop production completely and work on rectifying the issue.

After the rewiring took over a year and a half to complete, only 25 A380s were ready at that point, with massive delays and backlog on finishing production of the standard A380.

Due to the constraints, the A380-800F was cancelled.

Quite a shame really, as the aircraft would have been unmatched in terms of capacity and performance (with the exception of that SINGULAR Antonov An225 Mriya). Never know, we may see some old A380s get converted in the future 😄

The standard A380 carries a full load of passengers (with their own cargo), plus take into account the weight of the seats, toilets, bars, public amenities, extra cabling for IFE and such… Then you have an empty aircraft. It doesn’t exactly struggle to carry itself fully loaded, so I’m sure it would be fine with cargo.

4 Likes

Copied and pasted straight from Wikipedia:

Airbus originally accepted orders for the freighter variant, offering the largest payload capacity of any cargo aircraft in production, exceeded only by the single Antonov An-225 Mriya in service.

1 Like

It isn’t designed for that type of weight.

The simple answer would be that the market doesn’t need one and in that term it wouldn’t be economically profitable to make one when there is demand for it.

It would simply flop… worse than the A380 did… the Freighter would not see any bright daylight ahead of itself since there isn’t really anyone wanting to order such a aircraft… I mean look at the 747-8F… the orders are way below what Boeing expected and hoped for but is still being used due to one of the main reasons being the 747 itself has a reputable past for decades that has passed. But the A380, size wise and all… not really what the market is demanding as of now. 777F’s are more of what freighter carriers want for the next decade. Twin-jet not multi ones.

1 Like

But the A380-800F would have been designed to take that kind of weight 🤨😉

4 Likes

There was also a more pressing issue, the size to weight ratio was perfect for airlines, you could fill it with seats before it exceeds it’s max takeoff weight. But for cargo they wouldn’t be able to get anywhere near the full volume before they maxed out the weight, so it would have been simply too big. Requiring such major modifications to make work that the program was scrapped…

2 Likes

Well yes, but the normal one isn’t.
I’m not at the position to say anymore though :)

2 Likes

You were actually completely right, they Aircraft couldn’t handle the weight to make it’s volume work as I stated above, so good work… 👍🏻

1 Like

What type of weight? A fully loaded AN-225 can still fly, AND it would be heavier than the A380F.

2 Likes

So what I’ve heard is that for the plane to be structurally stable the middle deck would have to stay. This means that really big and off items couldn’t fit. Another issue I thought would be loading and unloading as due to cockpit placement they couldn’t have a front large door and they could only use smaller side doors.

2 Likes

How many engines does an An-225 have?

But it’s made to handle that weight. It has more powerful eingens, and bigger wings. The A380 was made for pax, not Cargo from the drawing board, the two can’t just be swapped and nessarly be economically sound…

1 Like

Hence the A380Neo or Plus, but even that probably won’t be enough to solve the fuel burning problem

1 Like