Originally Posted by
tdracer
A temporary slump that had already lasted five years, and had no end in sight. I saw some of the Rolls proposals (I was working 757 at the time) - their 'updated' engine was short of the CFM56-7 on fuel burn/TSFC (which had already been in service for over five years). Aside from range, the 757-200, even with the updated Rolls engines, was killed by the 737-900ER in operating costs, and as I noted previously the 737 was way cheaper to build. The only way a '757NG' made sense was as the -300, and the operators had already figured out it was simply too big for a single aisle - turn times were horrid since it takes to long to load and unload. Further, while a good aircraft, the 757 is still a 1970s design. As for the 767-400 flight deck, the plan had originally been to spread it all through the 757/767 line, but that didn't happen. A big reason why it didn't end up on the 757 is that Boeing couldn't get Rolls to do a FADEC version of the RB211-535, so they had to retain throttle cables (which was incompatible with the 767-400 flight deck).
After ending the 757 production, that factory space was dedicated to building a couple of thousand 737NGs, that were sold quite profitably - instead of building a few 757s at a loss.
For all the bitching about the MAX being a re-hash of 1960s technology - the 757NG would be a rehash of 1970s technology with the same basic fuselage as the 737.
Time will tell what the NMA will be, and if it will be successful. But one thing about the NMA I can guarantee is that it won't be 50 year old technology.
Well, the 767 is the same ‘vintage’ technology and is still in production in both military and civilian versions, it’s still an economical aircraft that can be operated profitability for decades to come, and
it hasn’t had a significant, fuel burn reducing engine update
Technical issues with upgrading the 757 cockpit to a 764 configuration could have been solved
Your criticism of ‘50 year old technology’ makes no sense while Boeing has steadily improved, updated and developed new versions of significantly older models such as the 737 and 747, the visionary design of those airframes allowed for those upgrades and the 757 would have as well, it had enormous potential
Boeing’s decision to shut it down was a curious one, they’ve never prematurely done this with any other ‘7 series aircraft, the 747 has come close but management correctly saw the value of slowing production to a crawl while awaiting a market recovery, this has happened for the freighter version, I think there’ll be substantial further orders to replace the -400 F in the future
More 737’s could have been built by expanding elsewhere
Most importantly whatever the 797 costs to develop the 757NG would have been a fraction of that price, it would have been an ideal ‘placeholder’ while Boeing finally replaced the really outdated and compromised 737 with a new aircraft