Why Didn't Airbus Build An A340 Freighter?

The four-engine Airbus A340 was one of the most striking airliners of its generation. Between 1991 and 2011, nearly 400 examples of this long-haul widebody jet were built, spread across four variants. However, all four of these variants were dedicated to carrying passengers. Airbus produced cargo variants of several of its other designs, so why not the A340?
Article link: simpleflying.c...
Video sources:
beluga • ✈ Super Transporter Ai...
Beluga XL in the making • In the making: Airbus’...
A340-300 Philippine Airlines • Philippine Airlines A3...
Etihad storage parking • Getting Our Aircraft R...
British Airways Storage 747 • Video
Brussels Airline storage • Inside Brussels Airlin...
A350-900 Vietnam SkyteamLivery • 【4K】『SKYTEAM　特別塗装機』ベトナ...
777 convert emirates • Emirates modifies 10 B...
A330-200F • The Airbus A330-200F: ...
A300 FedEx • FedEx A300 [N658FE] Ta...
A340-600 Airbus • Airbus A340-600 at the...
Hi Fly fleet a380 a340 a330 a320 • www.hifly.aero
A340 A380 Hi Fly Supplies • Hi Fly Humanitarian Fl...
A340 Virgin Atlantic • Virgin Atlantic A340 S... )
A340 Virgin Atlantic • Virgin Atlantic Airway... )
Airbus A320 A330 A340 heritage • History of Airbus fami... )
German Air Force A340 • NAIA - German Air Forc...
A340 Air Belgium • AIR BELGIUM TAKE OFF c...
A340 Lufthansa Star Alliance • Emergency Landing! Luf... )
Simple Flying:
Visit our website where we publish 150-200 news stories per week: simpleflying.com/
Listen to our weekly podcast: simpleflying.c...
Download our iOS & Android app: simpleflying.c...
Daily email digest sign up: simpleflying.c...
Check out our second KZbin channel: / @longhaulbysimpleflying
Follow us on social media:
Instagram: / simpleflyingnews
Twitter: / simple_flying
Facebook: / simpleflyingnews
Linkedin: / 33222643
#aviation #flight #avgeek #airlines #flying

[@Janskatesnyc]

A340-600 is a beautiful plane

[@H_Dave_H]

A flying long-sausage is the best!

[@christopherescott6787]

The 200 and 300 are very power lacking for the weight of the frame. Thus ,it would make sense not to have made a cargo version with those same power plants. The 600 is far more powerful. Still ,if a re engined version had been sought, I think a F model could have worked with it's size.

[@LH1836]

The A340-300 can carry more payload than the A330-300 and there are A330-300 being converted into freighters so the A340-200/300s seem not too lack as much power as suggested.

[@johniii8147]

@@LH1836 It's a heavier airframe and was underpowered for a freighter version. Lack of power was always one of the weakness's of the 340.

[@johniii8147]

@E The 330 ended up with higher powered engines to manage that and at significantly lower weight so that never proved to be an issue. Technology just moved on you didn't need the weight and expense of 4 engines.

[@LH1836]

@@johniii8147 As I said, the A340-300 can carry more payload than an A330-300 (52 t vs 45,6 t). Furthermore, the A340-300 weights only 1,6 t more compared to the A330-300. Your argument is not correct.

[@johniii8147]

@@LH1836 It is correct. They developed the HGW version of the 330. The fact they discounted the 340 now 10 years ago says all you need to know. Wasn't a market for it.

[@texasabbott]

Can you imagine an A340-300F loaded with freight, using whole lengths of runways, struggling into the sky with its four hair dryers buzzing away? (Airbus should do it! Convert as many as you can. It would be funny to see)

[@Kalvinjj]

Sounds like Aerosucre might be upgrading to widebodies if it happens

[@12345anton6789]

Actually a fully loaded A340-300 requires shorter runaways than a fully loaded 747-400ER

[@andreadevetak4325]

A340F:Let me swallow you up! A350F:How dare you say such a thing!

[@nurrizadjatmiko21]

It is impossible for Airbus to build A340F but maybe the A350F would work in the future

[@johniii8147]

We shall see how the 350F goes. It so far has no confirmed orders. It was a soft launch to drum up orders before the actual development moves forward.

[@richarddastardly6845]

No way would that have been competitive against the B767/777

[@suddhojitgon5929]

The A350 cargo might prove to be a game changer for Airbus.

[@leschase1824]

European Cargo currently operate 3 or 4 A340's for cargo from China to Bournemouth daily, then on to JFK every other day. 9H-EAL currently parked in Abu Dhabi. 9H-NHS has been on Bournemouth to JFK, with 9H-PPE and 9H-PGS flying from Bournemouth non stop to Fuzhou (FOC) China. As I understand this is correct on 21/08/2021

[@johniii8147]

Those are not converted freighters. Those are just passenger aircraft with the seats taken out.

[@tjsaviation9789]

Early amazing video love you content and thanks for the detailed information!

[@justplanecrazy5575]

The a340 can barely lift its own weight I’m not surprised there wasn’t a freighter version

[@josh_jc_cheng]

Cause you simply don't put more weight on an aircraft that already struggle to takeoff and have 5 APUs instead of 2 engines (or more)

[@jjaus]

Everyone knows they struggle to take off. Except they don't. This Boeing fanboy BS is a lie. They may not climb very quickly with a full load for a 14hour flight, but they can climb straight to cruising levels without stepping.

[@togafly.]

5 apu's?

[@josh_jc_cheng]

@@togafly. APU are just smaller jet engines

[@togafly.]

@@josh_jc_cheng i know that

[@togafly.]

@@josh_jc_cheng my question was whether a340s had 5 apus instead of just one like most?

[@itsandymorley]

There is a cargo airline in the UK that has cargo A340's. They bought some of Virgin Atlantic's retired ones and converted them. Seen them flying in and out of Bournemouth on the south coast a few times.

[@izzathaikal54]

Yep.. European Cargo UK and Maleth Aero from Malta use the A340-600 for Preighter flight

[@spongebubatz]

They didn‘t convert them, they just pulled the seats out. Like Izzat said they are just preighters

[@no-damn-alias]

the passenger version already relies on the curvature of the earth to take off. Can't imagine a freighter version. It will start like a swan from a lake

[@droidforecast7441]

I was lucky enough to spot all the 340 preighters for the the very first time at CCU. Namely those were 9H-FOX, 9H-SOL, 9H-SUN. That is something what I'm thankful to Covid 😂 Seen this beautiful bird closely.

[@spongebubatz]

9H-SUN was a frequent visitor at my local airport during the last year and the beginning of 2021

[@rossmason8812]

Airbus could have manufactured a few a340s as freighters which would be a good experiment, especially as it succeeded with the 747. The a380 may be successful also.

[@spongebubatz]

You can’t simply built a few aircraft for experimental cargo use without a big enough backlog of orders. (The A340F would’ve needed several modifications like the A330F). The A380 is a horrible freighter and there are many reasons why we won’t see one. This has been discussed countless times before

[@PedroConejo1939]

There's an ex-Virgin machine operated by European Aviation, flies over us to Bournemouth from time to time. I think it flies medical supplies judging by the NHS logo on the side.

[@spongebubatz]

Yeah, but that’s a preighter and not a freighter

[@eurowings1mc735]

I think a P2F conversion would be a good idea for the A340. Although it is not as fuel efficient as the A330 it still is a good aircraft. We see airlines abandoning the A340 due to the COVID crysis. The demand for cargo aircraft is constantly rising though.

[@12345anton6789]

It’s only the A340-600 that would make sense to build a freighter of. It has very similar numbers like the 747-400 when it comes to payload, range and fuel burn. It wouldn’t have the benefits of nose cargo door, but it can carry much more “belly cargo” and have the similar size on the main deck as the 747. But the 777F killed it that idea in 2009

[@johniii8147]

Nope. It's no where close to the 747-400F in terms in payload or volume. The nose cargo door isn't much of factor since rarely used and the passenger converted 747 don't have the nose door anyway.

[@rodneymcdonald4417]

I think Airbus should compete directly with Boeing on the airfreight market, NO QUESTION! However the the A340 is not in the game at all with 4 engines. Feasible or not the airlines won't accept the risk of competing against 2 fans. Now having said that a few may try but we all know where that ends up. Hope they make a few bucks for trying though! I'm an efficiency nut who's always wished if it's the same airframe and wing as an A330 why can we just engineer an affordable reduction to 2 more powerful engines and there would be all these ( pretty low time airframes) available for conversion to freighters. But I've been told the engineering costs outweigh the benefits. Maybe I'm "Naïve" but I wish we get more use out of all these airframes we are retiring so early.

[@ChrisZoomER]

I want Simple Flying to make a video answering why Airbus didn't built an A330-500 or A330-600 like they did with the A340. After all, it would've been similar in size to the 777-300ER; thus it'd make a great competitor... or wouldn't it?

[@chingweixion621]

Think they were kind of limited by the engine options. Boeing had secured an exclusive use of the GE90 engines. RR and PW on the other hand is not able to offer any larger engine than what they offered for the B777-200ER. Hence the airbus A330-500/600 will still not be able compete with the B777-300ER.

[@louissikkema5399]

the a330-neo is about the same thing as the a340-500/-600

[@chingweixion621]

@@louissikkema5399 A330neo is still smaller than the A340-500/600. The A330-900 can only seat less than 300pax in 2 class. It only gained range from the more efficient engines.

[@louissikkema5399]

@@chingweixion621 yes and for the bigger capacity there are the a350 variants, as far as I know even the pilot training from a330 to a350 is minimal, so a bigger a330 would only hinder a350 sales

[@ChrisZoomER]

@@louissikkema5399 Though they couldn't have stretched the fuselage or enlarged the wings?

[@semperjr]

Haven't heard the performance figures of the new A350F but the 777F carries 105 Tons. The A350F will likely be more efficient but it's a different landscape for cargo as less capacity at a higher price tag is not what cargo operators are looking for and there is no way the A350F is going to be cheaper than a 777F

[@johniii8147]

There are no performance stats since there is not finalized design yet. They are just shopping the idea of 350F so far.

[@semperjr]

@@johniii8147 Thought they offically launched the A350F already.

[@theultraaviator665]

The A350 will do great as a freighter

[@XLRSAv]

They didn’t cuz they don’t like plane spotters…

[@marlinelmagico7B]

Don’t think it would have done very well. Boeing is struggling with sales of their 747-8 freighter. In fact I think the production of these aircrafts is coming to an end even after airlines have recognized the value of freight operations brought by the pandemic. The age of the four engine aircraft has simply come to an end.

[@flypawels]

Samaritan's Purse flys DC-8 as a freighter.

[@p1xlb522]

i always liked the 600, its uncannily long. Maybe Airbus could've put the A340 in neo program making it viable for freight use.

[@spongebubatz]

Nope, also the -600 would’ve been one of the worse versions to become a freighter. Also a 4 engine neo is exactly the opposite of what the NEO programs intentions are

[@p1xlb522]

@@spongebubatz wasn't saying Airbus should make the freighter version from the -600, even if they did, it could compete with the 747-8F. The reason they didn't make A340neo probably because the A350 has similar capacity and range but with 2 engines instead of fuel guzzling quad.

[@spongebubatz]

@@p1xlb522 it couldn’t compete with the 747, even the upcoming 777-300BCF can’t. Also the A346 lacks possibilities for a big enough cargo door The main disadvantage of four engine aircraft are the four engines whose maintenance costs twice as much as the one of a two engine aircraft

[@adamcollins9404]

Simply look at Maleth and their EX VS A340-600's

[@spongebubatz]

They are Preighters, not freighters. It’s a huge difference

[@letsseeif]

You've basically made the case, and answered it too.

[@williambush7971]

Kennedy Steve described the A-340 as a plane with 4 hair dryers for engines. SLOW!!

[@yaoyaohorse7742]

5 APUs......

[@neilpickup237]

I think that the A340 isn't appreciated for what it is. It far too often written off as a rather unsuccessful model rather than a far more successful 4 engined VARIANT of the A330, plugging the gap with a much lower level of investment until ETOPS changes rendered it unnecessary in many of its previous roles. However, where 4 engines are still required, it can make more sense than a 747 if the additional capacity is not required. I think it could well have a novel use (runways permitting) as a mixed passenger/cargo version for locations which still can't be served by 2 engined aircraft as the 727s, DC8s and MD11s reach the end of their lives - especially tourist locations where only having boat accessibility would be unacceptable. Having such a high degree of commonality with the A330 should also help with lower maintainance costs than the increasingly obsolete alternatives. How about a LEAP re-engine - being a relative of the A330, I doubt if ground clearance would be an issue?

[@louissikkema5399]

interresting is also that edelweiss just has retired their a330 and kept their a340-300's because they wantet only one type of aircraft on longhaul and the a330-300 just does not have the range to reach some of edelweisses destinations with enough capacity. Swiss is said to be retiring three aircraft of its longhaul fleet and many people jumped to the conclusion, it would be the thre 343's they would retire, but they probably will at least keep two of them around for the routes where the 777 has to much overcapacity, but the a330 has not enough range.

[@leezinke4351]

What about B787F???

[@spongebubatz]

Boeing has the 767F, 777F and maybe a 777-8F in their line up which cover the same capacity

[@leezinke4351]

@@spongebubatz Ok

[@bonelesswatermelon420]

If old A340 prices get low enough then perhaps it can be viable to develop an A340 P2F. Fuel efficiency is not as big of a concern for cargo airlines who only fly their aircraft at a fraction of the rate of passenger airlines. The biggest concern for freight airlines is the purchase price. Given that nearly no one wants to purchase/lease an A340 nowadays, I have a strong feeling that we may one day see a very small fleet of A340 P2Fs flying. However, there is a better use for old A340s - as engine testbeds. Given that flying testbeds HAVE to be 4 engined airliners, the A340 is a great solution to potentially replace older 747 flying testbeds.

[@johniii8147]

That ship has sailed. The feedstock for a formal conversion program isn't there. Most of the retired ones have already been sold for scrap. It's not worth the expense to go through a conversion design and all the certification requirements and testing.

[@mirzaahmed6589]

Answer: no one wanted any.

[@equin_xx]

notification squad

[@Zackman217]

Why does Boeing always win in the freighter market?

[@spongebubatz]

They just had the best aircraft for each side. Airbus had the A300F and A310F which were rather popular but other than that Boeing aircraft usually were more fitting, a 767F for example suits cargo ops better than the A330F

[@aliefabdurrahman3302]

Rolls-Royce Trent 500 and a340-500/600 please

[@jantschierschky3461]

I just wonder if the 380 could be converted to a freighter, can the centre floor removed and still be licensed ?

[@spongebubatz]

No, an A380F will never happen no matter whether it’s a converted one. They could only use the lower deck, the middle floor must stay for structural integrity and the upper deck is too weak to hold much freight. And we haven’t even talked about efficiency and weight yet

[@jantschierschky3461]

@@spongebubatz I believe you could always strengthen it, but believe you right. Just wondering

[@spongebubatz]

@@jantschierschky3461 another reason why you can’t use it is weight. The A380‘s additional payload isn’t too high for an aircraft that size, if you want to carry cargo in the upper deck you can’t even fill it to have the need to strengthen it

[@jantschierschky3461]

@@spongebubatz well as I said, take floor out. There was a planned version and people wanted to buy. So there is a potential, however unlikely

[@spongebubatz]

@@jantschierschky3461 no, the middle floor must stay. The cargo version wasn’t a hollow fuselage like the beluga but also had two decks. It’s essential for the A380, you can’t take it out!!!

[@MSRTA_Productions]

E

[@BomberMilan99]

There is a 3rd party freighter conversion of the a340

[@johniii8147]

Nope. That's the 330

[@BomberMilan99]

@@johniii8147 G-Ecla

[@kingsharkoon]

Little correction: The A310 freighter all have been converted passenger planes. The A310-200C (passenger with freighter capability) was the closest to a dedicated freighter. The A300F4-200 and A300F4-600 were the only dedicated Airbus freighter before the A330-200F. :)

[@azrieljamesesplana6398]

Luh! Bida-Bida ka.

[@theaviator_7678]

I feel like there was no need for an A340 freighter. Despite it being my favorite widebody of all time, There was already a freighter version of its younger sibling, the A330 and also the A300 and A310. (I also feel like there was no need for the A310 because it is the exact same as the A300 and is smaller, but that's a whole different story)

[@louissikkema5399]

well, the a310 had its market due to increased range, the a300 could barely fly transatlantic, the a310 was perfect for transatlantic flights on routes not big enough for the 747 or later 777

[@theaviator_7678]

@@louissikkema5399 Ah ok.

[@porcelainthunder2213]

If you're going to take the 4 engine hit, just get a 747 which can carry much more cargo for pretty much the same cost. Plus, it was designed to be a freighter so less modification is needed to convert a passenger version to freight only.

[@flyingfurs]

Correction: Maleth-aero actually has a few A340-600Fs still in operation!

[@spongebubatz]

Which are preighters, not freighters, which is a huge difference!

[@Mr_Jetsavation]

But they are now oprated by European cargo

[@johnpatrick1588]

The engines on the A340 are referred to being as powerful as blow dryers.

[@americanrambler4972]

At roughly a 1,000 pounds or 500 kg of fuel burn per hour, that is a big pile of money! Plus the 777 flys a little faster. The 777 also has a higher payload weight and volume capacity. So for freight duty, the 777 just eats the A-340’s lunch. The one place the 340 wins is maximum range, by a noticeable amount.

[@debashis169]

Preighters! What a funny name!😂👌

[@mingming9604]

0:21 cargo variants of several other designs? lol... what other designs except for the only A330-200F? For some weird reasons, airbus has never really get into this market and they are just barely scratching the surface with the A330-200F If you don't think about trying to design one from the get go, you are gonna be playing catch up. Perfect case is the A330-200F. They didn't think about designing a freighter variant in first place and only was an afterthought. Which is why the -200F has that nosegear blister so that it would be level to the ground for freight loading! Airbus really really needs to consider a freighter version right from the get go of designing a new aircraft, NOT later if they ever want to capture a good share from boeing!

[@kingsharkoon]

Airbus only ever had the A300 as dedicated freighter.

[@Kalvinjj]

the nose hump tho: to be fair if I recall the 777 uses powered loaders to compensate it's own nose-down attitude, so they too would need a redesigned nose landing gear or a similar hump if they didn't just "cheat" it. The A350 in other hand looks level on the ground, guess they thought of that from the start.

[@ahmadtheaviationlover1937]

The A340 is one of my favourite aircraft and it’s such a beautiful plane as well

[@franekzh]

Yes i agree

[@sweetdaddydee1314]

Even if airbus develops and releases an A350F, i don't see a way for them to crack the in a sense monopoly boeing has in the cargo market

[@aviationin4k258]

There is a maleth aero A340-600 converted freighter ex virgin Atlantic.

[@spongebubatz]

It‘s a preighter, like the HiFly A343s

[@LMays-cu2hp]

Thank you for this news in formation.

[@TheKasperlkopf]

md11 best freighter

[@tristanityy]

Go Philippines

[@omolemophaoe]

no comment

[@craigeagle9209]

The A340-600 would of made a good freighter

[@spongebubatz]

No, it wouldn’t. Some are in service as Preighters though

[@johniii8147]

No. It's too heavy relative to volume and fuel burn. Same reason it didn't succeed in the passenger market and got kicked off quickly by the 777-300ER

[@adamrameli1990]

cool

[@David1701G]

Why not a freighter conversion?

[@spongebubatz]

Same reasons

[@vistalite-ph4zw]

Very interesting, I was wondering why the A340s were not converted or made frieghters. The prieghter thing is different, why not just make a few combi's? A350 frieghter will be interesting but the 777 is way ahead of the game....

[@andreadevetak4325]

A340F:Let me swallow you up! A350F:How dare you say such a thing!

[@rye811]

yall should do a video on the us military activating the CRAF program

[@rinotilde2699]

They showed a clip of Philippine Airlines! Yay!

[@johnpatrick1588]

I saw it costs about US$10 million to convert a used pax A330 into a freighter.

[@bhuff123]

Skip to watch a good at making passenger airplanes and skipping the others

[@ralphsmith242]

The problem with the A340 wasn't the number of engines. It's problem was the number of tonnes. Note that the fuel consumption of the A340 compared to the B777; consumption is almost perfectly correlated to empty weight. Quad jets aren't less efficient that twins. Heavy jets are less efficient than lighter ones.

[@spongebubatz]

Another important factor is maintenance costs. Smaller engines don‘t have a lower costs but pretty much the same as their bigger counterparts

[@ralphsmith242]

@@spongebubatz Yes, but the engines are also one of the heaviest components. Having them spread across the wing, rather than in a single spot on the wing, saves some structural weight. Further, the engines can be put further (on average) outboard, thus matching the spanwise weight distribution with the spanwise lift distribution. The main problem with the A340 was poor design resulting in excessive overall weight. It should in principle have been about 8% lighter than a comparable B777.

[@spongebubatz]

@@ralphsmith242 where talking about different topics now. While you’re right with weight distribution, alone the fact that all engines have to be maintained is a reason against a 4 engine aircraft. 4 engines save costs when it comes to planning and building, but cost a lot when it comes to maintaining. That are two different topics not related to one another

[@ralphsmith242]

@@spongebubatz It is one reason against a quad jet, but there are important offsets. These include the weight issue I mentioned plus less reserve fuel because the thrust after an engine failure is only slightly asymmetric. The A340's major problem was not the number of engines. Its major problem was the number of tonnes.

[@philipkudrna5643]

An A350 freighter would probably make a good competitor against the Boeing 777 Freighter.

[@johniii8147]

That remains to be seen.

[@kharabovsk]

Some A330-300 were converted into Freighters , why not more A340s ?

[@spongebubatz]

Pretty much most of the reasons listed in the video

[@kharabovsk]

@@spongebubatz yes , but Hifly uses them for cargo for 2 years now , don’t they ?

[@spongebubatz]

@@kharabovsk They are preighters, not freighters, which is a difference. Also it’s very temporary and isn’t planned to go forever

[@kharabovsk]

@@spongebubatz yes so are A330-300s . Nethertheless the A332F is not a big success , is it ?

[@spongebubatz]

@@kharabovsk it wasn’t a success, no, but what does that have to do with what we have previously talked about? Yes, there are A330 and A340 preighters of all versions except A342 and A345 and the NEOs. Yet there are cargo full conversions for the A330-200 and -300, but we won’t see them for the A340 due to already known reasons

[@colinpovey2904]

Hardly striking. They look like a an over-sized 707. And beside, loading as shown in the video - hand-to-handwould kill any efficiency.

[@reko3103]

Is there a freighter version of the A330neo?

[@spongebubatz]

Not yet and it’s questionable whether we would ever see one. With A330P2Fs and the anticipated A350F it doesn’t really make sense, at least not in the near future

[@medviation]

I think the A350F is a mistake. It's too expensive up front cost. They should have done an A340 P2F instead. Buying freighters brand new is not ideal, and should only be last resort if no existing airframe conversion is available.

[@alexanderordinary2110]

When talking fuel efficiency, lets just say its complicated. The reason is bcuz the quad jets arent affected by the etops rules. In many instances they are able to fly more directly, saving on gas.

[@alexanderordinary2110]

@@TysonIke Yes, on paper that is true. But, ATC around the world dont necessarily take that into account all the time. It is quite common for quad jets to get clearence by them, than twins to fly more direct routes. This is especially true in East asia. There used to be a vid here on YT where a pilot explains that, and he went on to give many examples where his 340 was cleared, but the twins were not, for more direct routes. Not everyone in the world takes the FAAs rule, as the gold standard.

[@kanishkasandeep880]

A350 s and A380 are the best modern passenger air crafts. A350F will be a huge success