Tech Stop Cargo Question

[tungstennedge]

I'm flying MD11F to fill 120 000kg of cargo demand, at 5000NM or range. Should I use one flight, with a techstop to fill 90 000kg demand, or run two flights directly, holding 60 000kg each?

[Tha_Ape]

In that precise case, I'd say 2 flights. Yes, they'll be less profitable than a single one, but they will still get you more, and what's more important, you'll be less vulnerable to competition as you'll diversify the supply.

But other figures doesn't necessarily mean the same answer.

[tungstennedge]

Thanks. In what case would it be better to fly once, I'm not sure how cargo is effected by tech stops.

[Tha_Ape]

Cargo is currently not affected by tech stops. The only difference will be the length of the journey, and the slightly increased costs (fees at tech stop, more fuel because of longer journey overall + 2 take offs and 2 landings per leg).

You would want to fly only once if the route was already supplied, and depending on the supply you would possibly want a non-stop flight as well.

Also, if your cash reserves are low and the RI is still low, better fly only once until RI builds up: 2 VL a/c completely empty for months and months is very very costly to maintain.

Then it also depends on current demand vs potential demand. If current is close to potential, then it's less risky. But if it's the opposite, your 2 flights would fight for 2 bits of cargo for months before RI builds up and current demand gets progressively closer to potential. Better check the possible duplicates on that city pair: from LGW, LTN, etc. Think "city pairs" and not "airport pairs".

If we're talking about the US East Coast, then be extra careful, the overlapping areas are just everywhere. NY shares with Boston and Philly, that shares with Baltimore and Washington, etc. If it is the case, it's pure dreaming to think you could fill 2 MD-11F. If you fill one, you could already consider you happy.

[tungstennedge]

Thanks for all that info, should help me plan out my cargo much easier. The route I was doing was LHR to Nagoya I believe, 140k potential, 120k current, I had one plane direct on it, since I didn't tech stops do not negatively effect cargo lf, and it hit 100% lf just recently so i wanted to increase supply. Its making a ludicrous 500K in ONE flight, just the way there though. The way back is only 100k tho, note sure why that is.

[Tha_Ape]

Cargo is asymmetrical (like IRL). However a 55% LF on the average of both legs is usually enough to make you break even. And if HC is here, then no worries. At all.

The only "bad" side is that to find good cargo routes you have to check the demand on both legs, as sometimes with "traditional" check you just see a lame outbound leg demand while the return leg is more than juicy.

[knobbygb]

FWIW, I have flown Europe to Japan cargo-only with 737-200F with TWO tech-stops and still made a ton of money!

On the question of 2 x 60k or 1 x 120k - remember that fully supplying the demand is NOT always the best way to make money. Personally I'd just send 1 x 60k aircraft and hike the prices a lot. I reckon, once established, you could charge 70% or 80% above the default price and still be nearly full.  This would save you fuel and other direct costs, staff, slot fees, aircraft lease/purchase/conversion and would also limit waste on the non-symmetrical demand (only one a/c flying nearly empty rather than two). I reckon the profit would be more than 2 x 60k aircraft could ever make (without competition of course).

The other argument hold weight too - especially when there's competition.

[gazzz0x2z]

FWIW, I have flown Europe to Japan cargo-only with 737-200F with TWO tech-stops and still made a ton of money!
(.../...)

My A321F do wonder in GW2 as well, with double tech stops. And considering the low cargo demand to my small airports(ALC, BUD, WAW, mainly, for cargo), the risk of an attack is meagre. Of course, they'd be crushed on bigger lines.

[knobbygb]

My A321F do wonder in GW2 as well, with double tech stops. And considering the low cargo demand to my small airports(ALC, BUD, WAW, mainly, for cargo), the risk of an attack is meagre. Of course, they'd be crushed on bigger lines.

GW1 is a little earlier so I haven't had chance to try A320 series freighters yet. I'm looking forward to playing...

[gazzz0x2z]

GW1 is a little earlier so I haven't had chance to try A320 series freighters yet. I'm looking forward to playing...

I had opened the routes with 727F, which had done a great job until 2015, too. When fuel prices were not too high, they were my best money earners. I had 21 of them as a third fleet group for ages, just because they kicked asses. Made my transitions horribly painful, but I sticked to them. Until I could get vastly superior 321F, of course.

[Talentz]

I would lean towards a 744F. But I guess that's just me. I would also just fly it once daily until you can safely expect no completion for that route. If this is GW3, then the GW is still young and the bigger airlines are still growing. Hence, its only a matter of time before pax routes fill up and bored players start eyeing cargo routes to keep busy.


Talentz