Rainboe:
Your diagram shows a different configuration! I do not believe yours would be able to achieve a good cruise altitude- that is not an accurate scale 757 wing! I think that diagram is a proposal for a B757-400 wrongly labelled.If you measure up the diagrams, you will find the proportion of wingspan/length is different for allegedly the same aeroplane. Where did you get your diagram?
I got it from
757.org.uk | doors and door configurations it seems correct to me.
chornedsnorkack:
So, summing up: what do you think would be the most efficient way to design an airplane with 120...150 t MTOW and 200...250 seats? A short widebody, like A300/A310/B767 non-ER, or a long narrowbody like 757-300/DC-8-61/63?
I depents on how important e.g. Cargo & First / Business class are. A wide body offers better cargo potential and flexibility in configuring competitive premium cabins.
If that is less important (e.g. leisure market, opening up new routes, thin routes etc.) a narrow body offers superior OEW, drag, single aisle crew efficiency and most of all: fuel efficiency. Wingletted 757s made an impressive revival during the last few years on the Atlantic..
