Could Boeing remanufacture the 757?

[NWSRG]

I had considered putting this question on the Tech forum, but as a non-aviation professional, I suspected I might get flamed!

This is purely hypothetical, and really just a bit of fun, but I was wondering if Boeing could take old 757 airframes, and 'zero time' them.

Seems to me that the AA order for A320s proves that Boeing have nothing to replace the 757 at the moment, and the A321NEO is the nearest bet. So if Boeing had been able to offer something, would AA still have gone to Airbus? Or for that matter Delta, or United, as they probably will sometime soon?

So the proposition. Take existing 757 airframes, and remanufacture them. The GTF is good for 40,000lbs, and would probably fit comfortably in place of the existing Rollers. Add in the 787 flightdeck, and you have a common-ish type rating. Now beyond that, what would you need to do technically, to wind back the fatigue life? Replacement of high stress components? New landing gear?

If you get really ambitious, throw in a new carbon wing. Or at very least, replace the triple-slotted flaps with double-slots. FBW? Well, if the 748 can go part FBW, maybe also the 757...

And Boeing Military have a fine pedigree in remanufacture / life extension.

Let the debate begin.

[11Fan]

Flamed no, enlightened, perhaps.

It's not cost effective really, given the magnitude of modifications you are suggesting.

That said, save for the wing, and not as fancy a suite of Avionics, add a Cargo Door and you've just described the FedEx 757 P2F Program.

I"m pretty sure that a New Wing (Box) would require a new Type Certificate. I don't think you can do it with just a Supplemental (STC).

[contractor25]

To cut a long story short, a FBW system would require an extensive testflight program as the primary flight controls are effected. In addition, the wiring would have to be completely changed.
It entails stripping out the complete fuselage to rewire.

Now, there are Fokker 100's that have 40,000 cycles on the frame (original design 60,000 cycles) and they nearly crack faster then one can repair them. The reason that these types of airframe are retired has really not much to do with the fuel usage of the engines, the frame itself gets too old and brings additional and unpredictable cost/time during the bigger inspections(c + d checks). Then add to that the higher fuel burn and it'll be cheaper to park said aircraft in the desert and buy a new one.

[TSR2]

How about a simple new-build B757 NEO incorporating existing design winglets ?

[Chidken Sangwich]

A B757 NEO probably would have worked if Boeing had'nt bulldozed the production line/facility.

Bet they are kicking themselves now as there is now demand again for this size/type of Aircraft.