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?
One notable Airbus freighter built was the A330-200F, of which 38 were
built. While this is quite a small quantity compared to the 645 passenger A330-200s,
it still shows that there was indeed a market for the type.
There were also cargo variants of Airbus’ older A300 and A310 designs. The former of these also
formed the basis for Airbus’s legendary ‘Beluga‘ outsize cargo aircraft. The European manufacturer
has also, more recently, developed the BelugaXL, derived from the A330-200F.
So with other freighter models produced, why not also develop an A340 variant for this function?
Well, as we’ve discussed in previous videos, a key issue with the A340 was its inefficiency.
Being a four-engined aircraft, the additional two powerplants demanded extra fuel
along with additional maintenance. This can see the type burn between 6,500
and 8,000 kg of fuel per hour. Meanwhile, the 777 burns between 6,080 and 7,500 kg per hour,
depending on the variant. When you consider that a cargo-carrying A340 would be laden with a heavier
load than just passengers and their baggage, this would only further worsen its efficiency.
One also has to consider market demand, or, rather, a lack thereof. Although the A330-200F
is an established freighter, it only makes up a fraction of the more than 1,500 deliveries from
this family. Meanwhile, the A340 proved far less popular than its two-engine counterpart,
selling less than 400 examples. As such, investing in the development of a cargo variant
would likely have seen minimal demand, and thus could have been a huge risk for Airbus.
Although the planemaker never produced a freight-specific version of the A340,
circumstances last year forced airlines to show greater flexibility. Particularly at its peak, the
coronavirus pandemic decimated passenger demand, while placing greater importance on airfreight.
As such, in order to keep otherwise dormant aircraft and crew active,
airlines began flying cargo in their A340s. Portuguese wet lease specialist Hi Fly was one
such airline to do this. The carrier stripped out three of its A340s for temporary use as converted
‘preighters’ (a portmanteau of ‘passenger’ and ‘freighter’). It had already done the
same with its A330 and A380 aircraft. Elsewhere in Europe, Air Belgium also got in on the act.
As a well-known proverb states, “necessity is the mother of invention.”
Such sentiments can certainly be said to be true for the coronavirus-driven
boom in preighter aircraft last year. While only a temporary fix,
this drive showcased the admirable adaptability that keeps aviation ticking.
These days, it looks like the A350 is set to get a freighter variant of its own- perhaps
signaling that Airbus is ready to compete more directly with Boeing in this part of the market.
How do you think the Airbus A340 would have fared as a dedicated cargo aircraft? Will
the A350 do well as a freighter? Let us know your thoughts in the comments!