Skip to comments.Aircastle set to buy 38 aircraft (UPS to lease 12 747-400F to replace A380F)
Posted on 01/23/2007 12:35:09 PM PST by Paleo Conservative
Aircastle, the only listed aircraft leasing group, yesterday announced plans to buy 38 aircraft from a Chicago-based investment group for $1.6bn, in a move which highlights the improving prospects of the cargomarket.
The portfolio includes 12 Boeing 747-400 freighters, the largest commercial cargo aircraft, with UPS expected to confirm this week that it has cancelled the sole remaining order for the Airbus A380F.
The proposed deal will almost double the size of Connecticut-based Aircastle, which was floated last year by Fortress, the private equity group.
The company is buying the 12 cargo aircraft and 26 passenger aircraft fromGuggenheim Aviation Partners to add to an existing portfolio valued at $2bn.
Steve Rimmer, Guggenheim Aviation's chief executive, described the move as an "opportunistic sale", though the group will remain in the sector through a fleet of 19 aircraft which it owns or has on order.
Aircastle described the move as "transformational", providing it with scale at a time when leasing companies are expanding their 30 per cent share of the global aircraft fleet as airlines look for more flexible financing options.
The sector is led by General Electric's Gecas unit and the ILFC operation owned by American International Group.
Some executives believe the sector may have reached the top of its cycle.
If you want on or off my aerospace ping list, please contact me by Freep mail.
"with UPS expected to confirm this week that it has cancelled (sic) the sole remaining order for the Airbus A380F"
Which, it seems, should cause Airbus to re-evaluate that idea. Wasn't the A380F a significantly large part of the program? With no buyers, that could be a problem...
Question 1: Can the A380 program be profitable without the A380 Freighter?
Question 2: Does it matter?
Question 0: Can the A380 program be profitable?
But the cancellation of Fedex and UPS orders for the A380F will open up about 20 early slots for the passenger version. This will cut down on the delays in getting passenger A380's to importan launch customers who are owed compensation for the delays.
UPS must have needed the additional 747's as soon as possible considering they aren't waiting for the 747-8F. They'll now have a fleet of 20 747-400F's. I wouldn't be surprised if Guggenheim Aviation Partners were to place a big order for 747-8F to replace the 12 747-400F slots they just sold (probably for a significant profit).
As I understood it, the A380F design group was also designing the stretched A380.
There were originally three customers for the A380F. FedEx cancelled their order, and Emirates converted their order into pax A380s. UPS was the sole remaining A380F customer, and if they cancel then that will simply move pax aircraft up in the production que.
I read a quote last week when UPS was denying that any decision had been made that UPS was just waiting until they could cancel their order penalty free.
Unless they sell 900 - 1,000 of them over the next 25 years without spending money to develop improved models and aggressively discounting their prices, they would have done better putting their money in US T-bills.
Shouldn't we spell it "programme"?
Feh ... I'm seriously dubious of that happening.
The problem of course is nobody wants a plane bigger than a 747. Can you say problem identification malfunction!
This plane comes to mind. Maybe they'll build a hanger next to the Spruce Goose so folks can see two very large planes that made no sense what so ever at once.
Expect the return of Flying Tigers Airlines before that happens.
Is that correct?
It's been claimed elsewhere that the schedule problems with the freighter are based on factory-construction problems in Hamburg, not "weight", as others have conjectured.
This tells me that freighter delivery slots and passenger delivery slots are not interchangable.
Did the article say they sold/bought slots or actual planes?
That would only be a factor if the passenger line were running to capacity; it's not. The limitation is getting the parts from the suppliers. Building assemblies for the freighter version that then have to be transported takes away resources from building parts for the passenger model. Also the freighter program was taking engineers away from fixing problems with the initial passenger variant.
This A380 debacle has been very interesting to watch from the peanut gallery.
I like the idea presented in post # 12.
Sweet .... anyone know where we can get a good photoshop of an A380 going down in flames?
Profit is irrelevant. The important thing are featherbedded union jobs and national pride, god know the French need all they can get.
Much as I loathe ScareBus, that's just a bit too sick even for my sick sense of humour. YMMV.
Thats like saying its better the titanic was hit from the front because that means more people with buckets can report to the rear of the ship to help bail water.