Originally Posted by
tdracer
When the 757 was originally designed (1978-1981), it was expected that the cost of jet fuel would skyrocket over the next 20 years (the number I remember was $10/gallon by 2000, which of course didn't happen). So, pretty much every design trade of lower weight vs. lower cost fell on the side of lower weight. Further, the 757 tooling was designed for a max production rate of 7/month (one very 3 work days). By contrast, by 2000 they were cranking out 737s at over 1/day. This gave considerable economies of scale to the 737 and much lower overhead costs per aircraft. Eventually as customers chose the 737 over the 757, and the production rate dropped on the 757, the overhead costs associated with keeping the 757 line open became too high (especially since that same factory space could be devoted to manufacture of additional highly profitable 737s).
Thanks for the insight! I had suspected overhead but not realized weight savings were prioritized in the design. I suppose overhead does not make that much of a difference once development and invest for tooling is written off.
So how does the 757 compare to the A32x in weight and fuel consumption? Propably apples and oranges because of size and range differences.
Did the 767 see the same optimization for weight? AFAIR, it does not compare favorably even to early A330.