Boeing 757

[Victor 102]

Is there anyone out can remind me when the 757 entered service with BA.
And while I am down memory lane perhaps someone remembers a Tristar in BEA colours, not for long because of the merger with BOAC.

[Flightmech]

A simple google search says Feb 9th 1993 on shuttle services between London and Belfast?

[DH106]

1983 surely for the 757 ? A simple search told me that much :rolleyes:

[arem]

Much earlier I think - I flew them for a couple of years in the mid 80's - a lovely aircraft to fly!

[Flightmech]

I don't think you flew them in the 80's :-)

[Offchocks]

If I remember correctly Monarch got theirs in 84 and BA about six months earlier.

[DaveReidUK]

If I remember correctly Monarch got theirs in 84 and BA about six months earlier.The first two arrived in January 1983.

[boredcounter]

First BA ones built from 82 so in service in 83 sounds about right. All of the first batch still going strong with DHK and EAT with the DHK ones carrying the same registrations now as when they entered service all those years ago.

[Airclues]

Flightmech

I don't think you flew them in the 80's :-)

Why do you say that? The 757 entered service with BA in 1983.

[treadigraph]

Definitely January 1983. Monarch started receiving theirs a month or two later.

[Tray Surfer]

G-BIK_ frames… We used to go past them on the crew bus all the time at BRU whilst they were being loaded/resting on the cargo ramp.

[DaveReidUK]

And while I am down memory lane perhaps someone remembers a Tristar in BEA colours, not for long because of the merger with BOAC.Yes and no.

Lockheed painted up an Eastern Airlines TriStar with the BEA logo and "Speedjack" for the 1972 Farnborough show, but the aircraft ordered by BEA were delivered in BA colours.

http://www.abpic.co.uk/images/images/1034404M.jpg

[Rev1.5]

I think I'd agree it was more like 1983.
We were doing major maintenance on them in 1990.

Update...

A quick check of GINFO shows G-BIKA first registered to BA on 28/03/83.

[Georgeablelovehowindia]

Monarch introduced the 757 to service in early April 1983. The first three aircraft: G-MONB/C/D were delivered with 535C engines and were retrofitted by Monarch Airlines Engineering Ltd. with 535E4 engines when they became available.

[DaveReidUK]

A quick check of GINFO shows G-BIKA first registered to BA on 28/03/83.G-BIKA was the 3rd aircraft delivered.

G-BIKB first regd 25/01/83
G-BIKC first regd 31/01/83

[Flightmech]

Flightmech

I don't think you flew them in the 80's :-)

Why do you say that? The 757 entered service with BA in 1983.

I said it because I was wrong. About 10 years wrong....ooops

[A30yoyo]

The TriStar at the 72 Farnborough had the BEA logos applied over here (possibly just temporary vinyl decals?)...here arriving at Heathrow in basic Eastern stripes
Photos: Lockheed L-1011-385-1 TriStar 1 Aircraft Pictures | Airliners.net (http://www.airliners.net/photo/Lockheed/Lockheed-L-1011-385-1-TriStar/0961177/L)

[India Four Two]

I think I only flew in a 757 once from London to Rome. I don't normally remember registrations, but this one was the unforgettable G-BIKE.

[4Screwaircrew]

India Four Two, you misread that one G-BIKE is a Piper Arrow.

[DaveReidUK]

India Four Two, you misread that one G-BIKE is a Piper Arrow. Originally owned by a company that installs velodrome tracks (founded by a former Australian cycling champion), hence the registration.

[SpringHeeledJack]

The venerable Ron Webb, responsible for just about every well known cycling velodrome in the world. You can experience 3G's momentarily when going really fast around the bends on the smaller tracks.

Do I remember correctly the BA 757's doing crew familiarisation on UK routes in 81/82 ? That plane was always good for a powerful takeoff.

[treadigraph]

The 757 and 767 didn't fly until late-ish '81.

An Eastern Airlines 757 and a Delta 767 appeared at Farnborough '82 and no doubt did some demo flights in the UK.

[barit1]

EIS for Delta 767 was about 2Q82; 757 about the same time.

[DaveReidUK]

EIS for Delta 767 was about 2Q82; 757 about the same time. First 757 delivered to Eastern was N506EA on 22/12/1982.

First PW 767 delivered was N606UA to United on 19/08/1982. First GE aircraft was N102DA to Delta on 25/10/1982.

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

India Four Two, you misread that one G-BIKE is a Piper Arrow.

Indeed; BA decided to miss out Kilo Echo, going from Kilo Delta to Kilo Fox in registration sequence for the 757. Something to do with Norman Tebbit I think. ;)

[lakerman]

Coming back from Rio on a business trip and flying on a Varig or Vasp DC10-30 arriving at LHR around 1130. Rang the wife in MAN saying I was OK and back in country to be told that MAN was closed and all flights canx. Still I boarded a BA B757 and off we flew to MAN. Arrived about 40 minutes later in foggy weather and on disembarking the a/c was handed a CAT111 tie for one of the first B757 cat111 landings in November 1984. I must admit I did just see the runway as the wheels touched. Being an avionics engineer, this was my very first Cat111 landing in anger so to speak, and I was very impressed with the smoothness of the aircarft. I had been on the flight deck of L1011, DC10-30 and A300-B4 aircaraft when cat111 landings had been carried out, but as stated earlier, this was the first in anger. I have only ever, to my knowledge been on a single other which was a LH CRJ200 coming back into MAN and carried out a Cat111 landing.

[arem]

Nov '83 to Feb '86 - think that counts as mid 80's

[Albert Driver]

We were very proud of the Electric Jet when it first arrived in BA and spent most of our time showing it off to numerous jump seat occupants from all over the airline and aviation world.
I remember the first time we took one into (still Soviet) Moscow on service, thinking as I got off:
That aeroplane probably has more computer power on board than the whole of Moscow put together. Shouldn't we lock it up or something?
But it was still there in the morning, a guard fast asleep against the nosewheel.......

Happy Days! The first, and only, time I was ever able to switch on the last word in brand new ground-breaking electronic technology and use it fully,

without asking the kids how.
;)

[malcolm380]

I flew as a passenger in a BA 757 from Edinburgh to Heathrow in about April 83. My colleague and I had been visiting what was then Ferranti in Edinburgh, and were studying the possible introduction of colour CRT displays into helicopters. As a result of a polite request, and a business card, to a FA, we spent almost the entire flight to Heathrow in the cockpit discussing the then new EFIS and EICAS systems with the crew. It was supposed to have been a Trident on the shuttle, but the 757 turned up instead. There were 4 captains on the flight deck, as I recall. One of the most memorable aspects of the flight was a take-off run of around 25 seconds, unlike the Trident. Those were the days

[India Four Two]

India Four Two, you misread that one G-BIKE is a Piper Arrow.

Yes, I must have misread - it was definitely bigger than an Arrow! I must have looked at the registration and thought how funny it was that there was a Boeing Bike!

[Krystal n chips]

" An Eastern Airlines 757 and a Delta 767 appeared at Farnborough '82 and no doubt did some demo flights in the UK

They did indeed and, using my charm and diplomacy, I managed to get a look around both.

The 767 found it's way to Luton, but nowhere further North of course, due to Britannia being the first operator in the UK.

[Bye]

This is the 757 (N505EA) at east midlands, having worked on the engine design i also got a look in her along with many other from RR.

http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h247/geoff_bye/757-225_filtered.jpg (http://s66.photobucket.com/user/geoff_bye/media/757-225_filtered.jpg.html)

[763 jock]

Spent many hours operating that aircraft when Airtours rescued it from storage. Loved flying the 757.

[tristar 500]

Shaggy Sheep Driver, it was not BA who decided not to take the registration of G-BIKE.


We were told that Raleigh Industries had pre reserved it, for obvious reasons, so we had to miss it out.

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

Ah, thanks Tristar. So much for the Norman Tebbit rumour!

[Curious Pax]

Shaggy Sheep Driver, it was not BA who decided not to take the registration of G-BIKE.


We were told that Raleigh Industries had pre reserved it, for obvious reasons, so we had to miss it out.

Don't think they had much choice in missing it out - according to the CAA's G-INFO site it was first registered on 18th April 1980, so nearly 3 years ahead of the BA 757s arriving.

First BA one I saw in service was at MAN on 22nd Feb 1983 when G-BIKB was the first 757 to visit on a proving flight. Seemed astonishingly quiet at the time, though now seems noisy compared to the 787.

[pax britanica]

As a slight distraction anyone here doesn't feel that the wonderful 75 is about as handsome as any airliner built , and such take off performance -even as Pax, it must have been a lot of fun up front especially with the two RRs making that wonderful close to flat out noise..
PB

[DaveReidUK]

Don't think they had much choice in missing it out - according to the CAA's G-INFO site it was first registered on 18th April 1980, so nearly 3 years ahead of the BA 757s arriving.BA only just missed out on getting G-BIKE - they originally reserved all the G-BIKx 757 registrations in 1980, well in advance of the arrival of the aircraft.

[chevvron]

Got a ride in the Eastern Airlines one at Farnborough when it appeared there (82?). The Boeing company don't do flying displays, so it did customer demos, departing and arriving back during the display. Went to Lands End and back; no alcohol served on board.

[Curious Pax]

As a slight distraction anyone here doesn't feel that the wonderful 75 is about as handsome as any airliner built , and such take off performance -even as Pax, it must have been a lot of fun up front especially with the two RRs making that wonderful close to flat out noise..
PB

I was lucky enough to get a flightdeck trip on a BA 757 from Heathrow to Schiphol one evening a few years ago (pre-2001 of course). For such a short trip I guess we were pretty light, so ATC invited us to go over the inbound stacks rather than under as was the norm. (I think they termed it "can you be at FL120 by such and such a point" but I understood to amount to the same). I don't remember how quickly we were up over 12000 feet, but it didn't take long. As fog had been forecast for Schiphol (but hadn't materialised when we got there - was as clear as a bell) the captain asked me to decide if they should do an autoland or a manual. Naturally never having seen an autoland closeup I asked for that, which was kindly obliged.

A truly memorable ride due to the hospitality of the flightdeck crew, such a shame that I won't get the experience again.

[chevvron]

I noticed on 505EA and subsequent examples I flew in belonging to Britannia, Monarch and Air 2000 that there was a noticeable sideways oscillation at the front end on climbout whilst accelerating through about 250 kts. It only lasted about 15 seconds but was quite noticeable.

[G-ARZG]

"Got a ride in the Eastern Airlines one at Farnborough when it appeared there (82?). The Boeing company don't do flying displays, so it did customer demos, departing and arriving back during the display. Went to Lands End and back; no alcohol served on board"......said Chevron.

...and I blagged the DL 767 down to Lands End on the Tues of the same show!
Shame it was 'dry ship'....

[Old Photo.Fanatic]

I attended Farnborough '82 wearing my hobby "Press hat" for a local paper .
Managed a demo flight on the 757, then next day blagged my way past the officious company rep to go on the 767.
On the pretext of doing a cockpit layout comparrison!!!!, so lots of time on the flight deck of the 767.
Enjoyed both trips out to lands end, I still have 2 complimentary ties from Boeing with the London logo of Royal Palace guards. Different colours for the different aircraft.
Those were the days.

My next 757 trip was in 1984 Heathrow-Schiphol on G-BIKI, which I think is still going strong with DHL.

[scotbill]

ATC invited us to go over the inbound stacks rather than under as was the norm
It was pretty standard to include "can give you high rate of climb" on the first call to Departures in the hope of getting an uninterrupted climb above the inbound stacks. It was an incredibly versatile aeroplane and lovely to fly.

[frieghtdog2000]

Many hours on the 757/767 and often offered and got the high rate of climb from ATC. Previous aircraft was the 1-11 and once offered ATC a "Good Rate" on an empty ferry LHR-MAN with little fuel. The reply "First Rule of ATC - Never Climb a 1-11".

[chevvron]

Comet 4b's of BEA often used to 'stack jump' in the late 60s/early 70s.(not the 4c of BOAC though)

[gruntie]

Some years ago I spent some time in the paddock of Donington Park race circuit, which lies a stone's throw from East Midlands airport. The paddock was (presumably still is) completely surrounded by tall, flat metal fencing, the only gaps being for the gates in & out. The airliners were landing from overhead that day: whenever a 757/767 flew overhead it left behind the most curious whistling, roaring echo that reverberated around the paddock and persisted long after the aircraft itself had disappeared. Other aircraft were just...other aircraft. A bit noisy as they were so low but no trace at all of the mysterious echo.
(chevvron, BOAC never operated the 4c: 4 only I'm afraid)

[A30yoyo]

Was/is the 757 classed as a 'heavy' for ATC purposes?...I recall some comments about powerful vortices from it, though its weight and size were in the 707/DC-8 bracket....presumably the 767 is a heavy?

[DaveReidUK]

Was/is the 757 classed as a 'heavy' for ATC purposes?...I recall some comments about powerful vortices from it, though its weight and size were in the 707/DC-8 bracketYes.

From the UK AIP:

"All Boeing 757s are classified as Upper Medium for wake turbulence separation application, irrespective of weight. This is due to an unusually high core vortex speed as generated by the B757 wing."

[thegypsy]

Used to fly both 757 and 767. Biggest problem remembering whether I had to step down entering flight deck:{

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

The 757 wake vortex was indeed powerful. Sitting in the garden of the 'Railway' pub at Mobberley when MAN were landing easterlies it was the only aircraft (inc 747s) that produced that weired whistling rushing sound of wake vortex.

I noticed on 505EA and subsequent examples I flew in belonging to Britannia, Monarch and Air 2000 that there was a noticeable sideways oscillation at the front end on climbout whilst accelerating through about 250 kts. It only lasted about 15 seconds but was quite noticeable.

Mate of mine used to fly them for BA. He says a firm touchdown would produce what they used to call a 'wet dog' landing; the whole aeroplane would shake laterally from tail to nose, like a dog shaking itself on getting out of a river.

[scotbill]

Mate of mine used to fly them for BA. He says a firm touchdown would produce what they used to call a 'wet dog' landing; the whole aeroplane would shake laterally from tail to nose, like a dog shaking itself on getting out of a river. That effect was caused by landing with crab on - often as a result of ignoring the Boeing autopilot's masterly demonstration of how to land in X-winds with crossed controls.

It is true that those choosing to remain with the kick-off-drift school often did produce a firm landing -- so his confusion is understandable ;)

[brakedwell]

Air Europe, BA and Monarch were the first UK airiness to operate the B757 in March/April 1983. Air Europe took over two early BA slots at short notice to reduce BA dept prior to privatisation. I completed the B757 course in Seattle during Feb/Mar 1983 and returned to Gatwick with AE's first 757, G-BKRM in the first week of April. G-BIKF arrive in May, leased from BA for the summer season together with 6 F/D crews. It returned to BA at the end of October. AE's second B757 G-BPGW joined KRM in March 1984 and 6 BA crews returned for six months. At the end of the summer season KRM was leased to BA for the winter of 84/85. More AE 757's arrived in 1985 and the crews were trained in house.
The first B757's were powered by RB211-C engines which had separate Jet and Fan effluxes and were prone to noisy burner vibrations when idling. In fact the noise was powerful enough to shatter windows in the Malaga terminal on at least one occasion. Later aircraft were fitted with RB211-E4 engines, which had scimitar shaped fan blades and a common Fan/Jet efflux.
At that time the B757 had the highest body/ground clearance of any aircraft built by Boeing, which made smooth landings tricky as there was very little air cushion. It was possible to land a B767-300ER smoothly almost every time and it was also more stable on the approach.

G-BKRM with RB211-C engines, Malaga 1983

http://i24.photobucket.com/albums/c32/sedgwickjames/aviation/GBKRMturnroundMalaga_zpse5061a44.jpg

G-BIKF Malaga, 1983

http://i24.photobucket.com/albums/c32/sedgwickjames/aviation/GBIKFMalagaJul1983_zps595e0f46.jpg

G-BNSF with RB211-E4 engines Banjuil Feb 1990

http://i24.photobucket.com/albums/c32/sedgwickjames/aviation/GBNSF.jpg

[thegypsy]

brakedwell

I beg to differ. I found the B757 easy to land whereas the B767- 200 and 300 the wheels always clonked due to their geometry which made a good landing always sound bad compared to the B757.:=

[Spooky 2]

I have to agree with thegypsy. The 757 had excellent landing qualities followed by the 767-300 and next the 767-200. All very nice handling aircraft.

BTW, when the FAA first designated the 757 as a Heavy aircraft it was only for aircraft with MGTOW weights in excess of 255,000 LBS. Boeing only built a few 757s with MGTOW at 255,500, along with MTW of 256,000 thus the true Heavy 757 was a rarity in those days.

[Bye]

The RB211-535C engine was the planned engine for the 757, but P&W claimed 8% better fuel consumption so Boeing put us under pressure to upgrade the engine.

To make the 535-E4, the 524 Core was de-staged and put into the 535 along with the snubberless, wide chord fan blades. We also used composites in the fairings, fan nose cone and thrust reversers, and as stated blended the outer duct over a pastry cutter inner duct which got the noise down a lot.

We still couldn't quite mach the fuel economy, but we had better reliability and a quieter engine.

A lot of the tech such as non heated fan nose for self de-icing and wide chord fan blades was passed back to the 524 which formed the RB211-524-D4D with the addition of FADEC.

[scotbill]

While the 757 was in general a nice aeroplane to land, we did find that the perception of the quality of said landing could vary depending on position within the aircraft with 'greasers' sometimes attracting criticism and vice versa.

Due to the difficulty of simultaneously occupying seats in the cockpit and in the rear of the aircraft, I am not aware of any reliable research into this phenomenon.

[A30yoyo]

I always thought it was strange that Boeing terminated the 757...I'm guessing it never quite sold well enough (especially the -300) and they had the 737-900 which could offer the same sort of passenger capacity and was more profitable to build? (The DC-8 was killed in a similar way to reduce competition for the DC-10, I think...and there wasn't at that time a suitable high bypass engine for the DC-8)

[semmern]

A three-page 757 thread, and no mention of the glorious RB211 buzzsaw noise? Used to watch the afternoon BA 757 land at ENFB Fornebu, sadly now closed, here in Norway when I was a child, plane spotting with Dad. Music to my ears the 757 was :)

[Hangar6]

OH-LBS Boeing 757-2Q8/W | Flickr - Photo Sharing! (http://www.flickr.com/photos/55198703@N02/12517153335/lightbox/)

[Midland 331]

The 75 appeared to have an amazingly bendy fuselage. I used them regularly on the Manchester shuttle, and sitting in an aisle seat right down the back, my eye had clear reference points (once it was the windscreen pillar!), and the flexing during an approach with a decent crosswind component was fun to watch. The motion could also be felt at the back.

Can anyone tell me what made the "coke can in an empty washing machine" noise when the engines were shut down but the visible blades turning slowly? Was this some of the blades rubbing/touching?

[brakedwell]

Can anyone tell me what made the "coke can in an empty washing machine" noise when the engines were shut down but the visible blades turning slowly? Was this some of the blades rubbing/touching?

The fan blades loosen in their mountings when they are not under load.

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

Quote:
Can anyone tell me what made the "coke can in an empty washing machine" noise when the engines were shut down but the visible blades turning slowly? Was this some of the blades rubbing/touching?
The fan blades loosen in their mountings when they are not under load.

Often used to get the 757 Shuttle from Heathrow to MAN and it was sometimes on a remote stand so we got bused out to it and entered via steps. Always used to amuse me watching the look on the faces of the pax as they climbed the steps in front of those engines, clanking round in the wind like a couple of knackered wheel bearings.

[rog747]

brakedwell beat me to it lol

BA's 757 B-BIKF went to AE on summer lease in 1983 and i flew to IBZ on it -
very nice it was too - night flight and a jump seat ride -
I joined MON in 1985 at LGW and by then all our 4 757's had E4 engines and a 223 pax fit.
always fell down the step into the cockpit.

the 757-200 imho is irreplaceable - all of the IT airlines bought it and BA had a very successful career with it in their fleet.

my last flight in one was on a Astraeus back from JMK.

you can bung it into places like Skiathos, Mykonos, and Bristol and use it on a short ski flight or a Palma in the morning then out to the Maldives or even further.
MON/AE/AMM sent theirs down there once ER'd - and to MCO, MBA, Phuket and as far as Puerto Vallarta.

Thomson are intending soon to replace theirs based at BRS but it is apparent the landing performance of their 738's will not be as optimum for the high operating weights that they can take in with a 757.
The t/o and landing performances are impressive on the 752.

the early/mid 1980's were formative in new a/c types a bit like today-
Britannia took their first wide body 767-204's in 1984 with 270 seats and were an instant hit -
British Airtours took some 393 seat Tristars from mainline.

the previous wide body IT op was the short lived Court Line Tristar operation 1973/4 and Laker was sadly gone by 1982.

seems on another post on Prune that Boeing is now saying they are looking at a need a 757 replacement -
er?

[blue up]

Too late for me, sadly. Last flight on the 757 in 3 weeks and then I start on the 738. :{

[brakedwell]

you can bung it into places like Skiathos, Mykonos, and Bristol and use it on a short ski flight or a Palma in the morning then out to the Maldives or even further.
MON/AE/AMM sent theirs down there once ER'd - and to MCO, MBA, Phuket and as far as Puerto Vallarta.

I went as far as Penang in the east and Acapulco in the west with AE 757's.

[Spooky 2]

I use to fly a 757 that had nine aux tanks in th belly. Longest flight was from Instanbul, non-stop to Boeing Field, Washington. 12:40. Wonder if there have been any longer legs recorded in the 57?

[brakedwell]

My longest was Karachi - Gatwick with 229 passengers in a standard 757 - 09.05.

[Airbanda]

The 757 certainly had redeemable TO performance.

The first to visit Leeds/Bradford was in early 1984. At time runway was 15/33 and only 5400feet.

Monarch put a 75 on what was normally a 737 operation to Palma. Presumably only carrying the 73's pax load but rumour had it they took baggage from co-timed Britannia flight saving that flight a tech stop for fuel.

[DH106]

Really? A 757 at LBA pre-extension? :eek:

[DozyWannabe]

A little bird tells me it was BA's request for a "low-tail" version which fundamentally altered the proposed design for the "mighty" 757.

http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a94/WtMiller/scan0008-2.jpg

I always thought it was strange that Boeing terminated the 757...I'm guessing it never quite sold well enough (especially the -300) and they had the 737-900 which could offer the same sort of passenger capacity and was more profitable to build?

It was arguably a victim of the continued success of the B737. From the airlines' perspective it was far more cost-effective to demand a stretched 737 rather than pay for conversion to the 757 - an aspect of the industry that Airbus capitalised on by making their entire FBW range practically identical flight deck-wise.

[Offchocks]

Although not having the same range but similar capacity, if BA were to order a fleet of 19 B737-900s today and using Boeing price lists, it would cost them around about UK1088 million. I've not allowed for any discounts but look what inflation has done!

[scotbill]

The interesting thing about the late change to the 757 tail is that I recall a sketch in Flight in the sixties (I think) for a new Hawker Siddley twin-engined concept. The suggested dimensions and configuration were almost identical to the eventual 757. Can't remember what engine was suggested.

Could it be that a lot of HS designers ended up in Seattle - and eventually won the battle with the T-tail lobby?

[Haraka]

Was it not a part of the 757 design philosophy to utilise as high a proportion of 727 components as possible?
Hence the original T- tail.

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

With wing-mounted engines a T-tail surely makes no sense. It simply adds weight because a stronger fin is required to take tailplane loads. Would use of the existing 727 tail, thereby saving some development cost, be worth that?

[Haraka]

Apparently the low tail was initially adopted c. 1976 with the then "7N7".
By 1977 it was changed to a 727 derived "T" tail ( along with 727 fuselage cross section) Boeing apparently stated that the "T" tail improved engine out performance and served to decrease cruise drag and therefore fuel consumption.
In 1978 the two configurations were fairly evenly matched in terms of stability , weight and drag, however the shorter overall length of the "low" solution fuselage for the same length passenger cabin claimed advantages in ground maneuverability.
By 1979 the design evolution had moved away from the "727" commonality of the tail as it would have needed major redesign for stability and control requirements of the then longer fuselage and wing mounted engines.
The low tail plane was thus finally adopted.

(Source largely Air International Jan. 81)

[Groundloop]

The original 757 design was basically a revamped 727 as mentioned above, hence the T-tail.

I think the claim that BA had a lot of influence in the switch to the low tail is rather over stretched. The 757 rear fuselage is basically a scaled down 767 rear end (almost, not quite!). The proposal from Boeing that the 767/757 could have a common type rating would have had a lot to do with the switch to a similar configuration so that handling was similar.

[DaveReidUK]

With wing-mounted engines a T-tail surely makes no sense.

If that's a generalisation, BAe and Antonov might disagree. :O

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

Both high wing innit. The tailplane and elevator would be in the downwash of the wing and in line with the engine on a high wing / low tail design.

The 146 is an odd fish anyway; 4 little engines instead of 2 larger ones!

The 757 is perhaps one of the best looking, if not the best looking, of 'modern' airliners. With a T tail it looks very odd! (If it looks right, it flies right. Usually!).

[G-ARZG]

I recall BA News at the time had a photo of a local model-maker (Hi Brian)
surrounded by T-tail 757 models in BA colours. Seems Mr Boeing bought them all back from him, did any survive, I wonder ?

[brakedwell]

There was a very nice T Tail model on display in Boeing's Training School when I was there in Mar 83, but I am almost certain it had a Boeing Colour Scheme

[Haraka]

Both high wing innit. The tailplane and elevator would be in the downwash of the wing and in line with the engine on a high wing / low tail design.
Wot like the Ant 124 you mean?
( No ,I don't know either, following on from the Il -76 and referencing the Lockheed C141 and C5 and even the proposed "Jet Belfast" it certainly surprised me when it emerged.)

Sorry about the thread drift......

[rog747]

My longest was Karachi - Gatwick with 229 passengers in a standard 757 - 09.05.

That would have been an AE flight from BKK or Penang routing - KHI - IST - LGW ?

how on earth did you manage KHI - LGW non stop with 229 pax - wow

[Lou Scannon]

I managed to fly Puerto Plata to Manchester with almost a full load in just 8.50....... way back in '95.

[staircase]

I tried to do POP to LGW in '94, but chickened out and went to Cardiff for some gas after 8hrs 20mins. It was a VERY full load of 233 and some very old 'children' on the load sheet,(if you see what I mean)!!

[brakedwell]

That would have been an AE flight from BKK or Penang routing - KHI - IST - LGW ?

how on earth did you manage KHI - LGW non stop with 229 pax - wow

The planned routing was BKK - KHI - BEL - LGW - Copenhagen with a full load of large Danes. I was keen to reduce the aggro caused by an impending Gulf War and used every trick I had learned when flying DC8 freighters. As it was a night flight traffic was light and we were given optimum flight levels for most of the route. I used manual throttles a lot as the auto-throttles tended to hunt up and down at that time. Numerous direct routings also helped. At TOD around Abbleville the fuel was comfotably above the line and well above the legal minimum on shut down.

[dukiematic]

I was lucky enough to get a flightdeck trip on a BA 757 from Heathrow to Schiphol one evening a few years ago (pre-2001 of course). For such a short trip I guess we were pretty light, so ATC invited us to go over the inbound stacks rather than under as was the norm. (I think they termed it "can you be at FL120 by such and such a point" but I understood to amount to the same). I don't remember how quickly we were up over 12000 feet, but it didn't take long. As fog had been forecast for Schiphol (but hadn't materialised when we got there - was as clear as a bell) the captain asked me to decide if they should do an autoland or a manual. Naturally never having seen an autoland closeup I asked for that, which was kindly obliged.

A truly memorable ride due to the hospitality of the flightdeck crew, such a shame that I won't get the experience again.

My first of several fam flights in the '90s was on G-BIKV with Capt Dickson and F/O Wales. They were the kindest hosts from pre flight to Helsinki right through to shutdown on the return. The feeling of being up front as the -535C's spooled up remains to this day. As does the sporty initial climb. And such a roomy office.... on a future MD80 trip I happened to mention to the Alitalia skipper my first trip up front having been on the 75. He smiled wistfully, as we taxied BEHIND CONCORDE to 27R, saying "ah, no fold down jumpseat in the doorway for you there- you could get a couch in the 75 deck...."

Such happy days.

[rog747]

The planned routing was BKK - KHI - BEL - LGW - Copenhagen with a full load of large Danes. I was keen to reduce the aggro caused by an impending Gulf War and used every trick I had learned when flying DC-8 freighters. As it was a night flight traffic was light and we were given optimum flight levels for most of the route. I used manual throttles a lot as the auto-throttles tended to hunt up and down at that time. Numerous direct routings also helped. At TOD around Abbleville the fuel was comfortably above the line and well above the legal minimum on shut down.




I wonder if that puts you in the 757 record books ? KHI-LGW with 229 pax in 9h 5m

I was Ops controller at Ogdens when we handled AE until the end so we may have met....I often wandered out to the 757's to see how the turnarounds were going...A few pals were AE CC too
Flew AE (and MON) 757 as pax LGW-BAH-CMB-MLE a few times on my hols....a looooong drag to get to a desert island

[El Bunto]

The interesting thing about the late change to the 757 tail is that I recall a sketch in Flight in the sixties (I think) for a new Hawker Siddley twin-engined concept. The suggested dimensions and configuration were almost identical to the eventual 757. Can't remember what engine was suggested.


HS.134 with RB.178 engines

http://www.aviadejavu.ru/Images6/AE/AE71-7/19-2.jpg

Very much a 757 before the 757 but of course at that time British industry wouldn't start any project without Government backing, so it was filed away.

Meanwhile Boeing took out commercial loans and go on with work.

[rog747]

Ah the secret RB-178 engine turbofan prototype which was originally known as the "Super Conway". This was the first large three-shaft commercial high by-pass ratio turbofan designed by Rolls-Royce in 1966; it was intended to power the following:-

Hawker-Siddeley HS-132 & HS-134 "projects"
BAC VC-10 DB265 "project". RB.178-14 27,500lbs thrust version. (double decker)
Bréguet Br.124 "project".
Shorts SC5 ./45 "project". Belfast with jets

A 44,000lbs thrust version was rejected in favour of the competitive Pratt & Whitney JT9-D turbofan for the Boeing 747 in 1966 but for the refusal of Boeing to accept the Rolls-Royce engine on the transatlantic 747.

The RB.178 engine was never flight-tested and never went into production as most of the intended applications remained unbuilt "projects"
The RB 207 intended for the abortive original Airbus A-300" project" of 1967/68 - went on to become the RB211 engine first used on the Lockheed L-1011 TriStar

[stilton]

Good aircraft, outstanding performance but a very rough ride in turbulence and a dead spot in pitch on rotation and after landing when lowering the nosewheel



The 767 was much nicer to fly apart from that unforgiving landing gear configuration

[TCU]

That sketch of the HS.134 caused me to dig out Graziano Freschi's excellent book "The BAC Three-Eleven". The following is his description:

"The HS134 study was launched in 1966 on the basis of a radical development of the Trident airliner...to be powered by two RB178 high bypass turbofans mounted on pylons under the wing. The later was based on a high aspect ratio, highly efficient supercritical design. The Trident cockpit and fuselage width were retained, but the stretched fuselage and low tailplane mounted at the end of the fuselage gave the aircraft the general appearance of the much later Boeing 757....The only good that came out of Hawker Siddeley's effort on the HS134 was the know-how on advanced supercritical aerofoils and on the general aircraft configuration (large wing mounted engines), knowledge that the company later put to good use in helping with design of the Airbus A.300"

So HS pretty much defined the configuration of the modern under-wing turbofan twin, both narrow and widebody

[DaveReidUK]

So HS pretty much defined the configuration of the modern under-wing turbofan twin, both narrow and widebody

Are you suggesting that the design of the 737, launched in 1964, was influenced by the HS134 two years later ?

[Harley Quinn]

Are you suggesting that the design of the 737, launched in 1964, was influenced by the HS134 two years later ?

Was the 737 fitted with high bypass turbo fans at launch then?

[DaveReidUK]

Was the 737 fitted with high bypass turbo fans at launch then?

No, obviously not. But the assertion didn't specify high-bypass fans:

HS pretty much defined the configuration of the modern under-wing turbofan twin, both narrow and widebody

So substituting Boeing for HS in that statement would be more accurate.

[Harley Quinn]

Dave, respectfully, no. I inserted the high bypass bit, the original statement regarding turbofans should still stand.

Maybe it would be possible to suggest that Boeing's underslung turbojet installations owe their origins to the He 280 :}?

[TCU]

No, obviously not. But the assertion didn't specify high-bypass fans:

So substituting Boeing for HS in that statement would be more accurate.

Not really, as I did not use the words low-bypass, which would be applicable to the 737.

Thanks HQ for getting my drift. I thought reference to the RB178 alone was the pointer to the modern configuration supposition

[Allan Lupton]

Maybe it would be possible to suggest that Boeing's underslung turbojet installations owe their origins to the He 280 :}?
More like the Me262 really when wing planform and empennage are also considered. . .

[DaveReidUK]

Dave, respectfully, no. I inserted the high bypass bit, the original statement regarding turbofans should still stand.

Maybe it would be possible to suggest that Boeing's underslung turbojet installations owe their origins to the He 280 :}?

I think you'll find that the only Boeings with underslung turbojets (as opposed to turbofans) have either 4, 6 or 8 of them. :O

[Harley Quinn]

I think you'll find that the only Boeings with underslung turbojets (as opposed to turbofans) have either 4, 6 or 8 of them. :O

I'd have defined those as pylon mounted, still, everyday's a learning day.

[DaveReidUK]

I'd have defined those as pylon mounted, still, everyday's a learning day.

Happy to help.

You've not been asked the question at interview, then. :O

PPRuNe: Advantages of underslung engines (https://www.pprune.org/questions/288909-advantages-underslung-engines.html)

[Discorde]

Interesting that BA planned a 200-seat 'economy' config for the B752 (post #71). Most charter operators squeezed in 235 seats. I once asked a Boeing engineer looking into condensation problems on our fleet whether the extra pax breathing out moist air had anything to do with the problem. His response: 'It has everything to do with the problem.'

The 757 was pleasant enough to fly although most dual-rated pilots preferred the 767. The 75's speedbrake wasn't too effective. Some cynics said pulling the lever activated an 'airframe buffet' device to con you into thinking you were getting a response of some sort.

[Harley Quinn]

Happy to help.

You've not been asked the question at interview, then. :O

PPRuNe: Advantages of underslung engines (https://www.pprune.org/questions/288909-advantages-underslung-engines.html)

No, you are correct, I don't know who would ask such a question, though most of the answers in the link do refer to or imply, pylon mounted, podded engines as opposed to the nacelle directly attached to the wing structure in the way early 737s and Me 262s were built.

To be fair, I think my differentiation is more precise :ok:

[DaveReidUK]

No, you are correct, I don't know who would ask such a question, though most of the answers in the link do refer to or imply, pylon mounted, podded engines as opposed to the nacelle directly attached to the wing structure in the way early 737s and Me 262s were built.

I've been asked questions a lot stranger than that in interviews. :O

[boeingeng]

The 757 was pleasant enough to fly although most dual-rated pilots preferred the 767. Really? - in my experience most pilots preferred to fly the 757 as they wanted to get there before the bar shut. :p

[bentbanana]

Hi there sorry to reopen this thread, are there any BA ex 757 drivers/engineers out there?

I would like to ask a question - the a/c with reg G-BMRA-RJ - were any of them delivered with RB211-535-E4 engines and later refitted with 535-C?

If that is the case - can anybody give a reason why?

(theres a few pints resting on the answer!!)

Many thanks if anybody can shine some light on this!

[clipstone1]

" An Eastern Airlines 757 and a Delta 767 appeared at Farnborough '82 and no doubt did some demo flights in the UK

They did indeed and, using my charm and diplomacy, I managed to get a look around both.

The 767 found it's way to Luton, but nowhere further North of course, due to Britannia being the first operator in the UK.
With the first BY deliveries being Feb 1984...B767-204 MSN 22980 G-BKPW, a non ER high density pax config aircraft with twin over wing exits. (as were all of the BY 767-200)

[rog747]

Hi there sorry to reopen this thread, are there any BA ex 757 drivers/engineers out there?

I would like to ask a question - the a/c with reg G-BMRA-RJ - were any of them delivered with RB211-535-E4 engines and later refitted with 535-C?

If that is the case - can anybody give a reason why?

(theres a few pints resting on the answer!!)

Many thanks if anybody can shine some light on this!

None of those early fleet 757's of BA's you mention were re-engined - nor were the few that AE obtained under a -236 BA order

why? not sure but I guess they were not required on the longer routes which eventually saw the E4 a/c used (LCA IST TLV ATH for example)
many went to DHL who did not re-engine them

Monarch re-engined their first few - with G-MONE IIRC arriving first with E4's

[brakedwell]

I was an Air Europe 757 Capt in 1993 and remember our first 757, GBKRM being re-engined not long after after the first summer.

[rog747]

I was an Air Europe 757 Capt in 1993 and remember our first 757, GBKRM being re-engined not long after after the first summer.

Sorry old chap not BKRM with E4's - must have been another one - pics in 2007 still show her sold off still with 535C engines

AE also leased in 1983 BIKF in BA colours
(BKRM was going to be BIKE with BA but NTU and went to AE)

I cannot think what AE 757 was/were re-engined....I'll have a dig lol

[brakedwell]

I won't argue with you, but I flew the Air Europe 757 for ten years and the only original engines were on KRM and IKF. KRM was re-engined after the first summer. We only had IKF for the first summer.

[rog747]

BA 757 G-BIKA to IKZ and MRA to MRJ.

In fact towards the end of these deliveries, BA was buying used C engines from Eastern, as Eastern were re engining all their B757 with E4 engines, and fitting them to new B757s at the factory.
BA did not see the need to re-engine as the average stage length/shuttle routes was short, even though the E4 had 10-15% lower fuel consumption than the C.

BA finally went for the E4 engine with PEA onwards which was originally bought for charter subsidiary Caledonian, and needed ETOPS approval for MCO.
All subsequent BA deliveries were E4 engines, because there were no more C engines

Monarch Airlines
G-MONB-D delivered with 535C engines (but all later re-engined with E4 engines)
G-MONE and after delivered with 535E4 engines

Air Europe
G-BKRM, G-BIKF, G-BPGW, G-BLVH delivered/leased with 535C engines (and retained)
Later Air Europe and Air Europa deliveries had 535E4 engines

LTS
D-AMUR-T delivered with 535C engines (and retained)

[rog747]

I won't argue with you, but I flew the Air Europe 757 for ten years and the only original engines were on KRM and IKF. KRM was re-engined after the first summer. We only had IKF for the first summer.

We would have met!! - as I was Duty Officer with Ogdens (we handled you) and I was always out at the AE and UX 757 turnarounds both long haul (and ETOPS) and the short hauls...

As for BKRM maybe she had new 535C's fitted?
but the photo in 2012 clearly shows no E4's under the wings

some history on her here 22176 ? MvN's Boeing 757 Website (http://www.b757.info/22176/)

[bentbanana]

For all who took the time to reply - many thanks indeed!

The beers wont be on me then.....

[brakedwell]

For all who took the time to reply - many thanks indeed!

The beers wont be on me then.....
Well done. I remember taxying RM into the slot next to the airport early in the summer of 83 when a large window facing the pan shattered due to the strange noise the engines used to make at idle as we shut down.

[tdracer]

I never worked the -535C, but my recollection is that the engine/aircraft interface didn't change between the 535C and the 535-E4 (just maybe some pin selections for the EICAS and FMC to account for the different engine limits and fuel burn).
If my memory is correct, it's not impossible that a particular aircraft might have switched between -535C and -535-E4 more than once. Aircraft comes in for heavy maintenance, they drop the engines and send them off to overhaul, then install whatever type they have a pair of handy (I'm pretty sure intermix wasn't allowed so both engines would need to be the same type).

[rog747]

Yes indeed - there was never a case of mixed engine types on the same air-frame.

Also a 535C (as built and fitted) aircraft was never temporarily fitted with E4 engines - They only had a full re-engine if the carrier or lessor wanted such, as has been noted above with the various fleet listings.

A new leased Monarch air-frame G-DRJC was not built with ETOPS and MON/OM wanted to do an ETOPS fit on her, but the lessor refused so an older ex 535C air-frame G-MONB had to chosen to have the ETOPS fit.

A quote from a chap (Red 5) some years ago here on Pprune who was a MON engineer -
NB was not the first choice, G-DRJC was the logical choice but the owner ILFC did not want it altered, therefore as the company had already committed to a very heavy Orlando programme and needed six aircraft NB reluctantly became the next aircraft to be converted.
The reason the company did not want to convert NB to ETOPS standard was due to the fact that being such an earlier build aircraft, the amount of modifications involved including major changes to the equipment cooling system was far more extensive than later build aircraft. However the task was completed and it has been a far better aircraft compared to NC.
G-MONB had a special status among British registered 757's.
It's old when she retired, & was the first of a type that really transformed the reputation of the holiday charter airlines and different mission requirements.

Quote from Tempsford -
The move to take the B757 was a major contributor to Monarch's survival in a very competitive market (1983) and a very shrewd one made when they still had Bristol Britannia's !.
MON/OM were also in the leading pack regarding EROPS (1988). Overcoming the ''if it ain't got four engines'' school of thought was hard work, but look at the situation now, few even bat an eyelid when they board a two engine aircraft for a long flight (few know what EROPS is)

Monarch converted 6 757 to ER config G-MONB, NJ, NE, NK, KE, & JB

Quote from Brakedwell -
I flew G-BKRM at Moses Lake on the 31st March 1983, the first time it had been flown by Air Europe pilots. We returned to UK with it on the 6th of April.
G-BIKF was operated by AE during the 1983 summer season.

Great memories of possibly my favourite airliner. The irreplaceable 757.

[tdracer]

few know what EROPS is

Easy! Engines Run Or Passengers Swim :}
I always thought it made a better acronym than ETOPS - Engines Turn Or Passengers Swim - just doesn't come across the same :O

[sandringham1]

I never worked the -535C, but my recollection is that the engine/aircraft interface didn't change between the 535C and the 535-E4 (just maybe some pin selections for the EICAS and FMC to account for the different engine limits and fuel burn).
If my memory is correct, it's not impossible that a particular aircraft might have switched between -535C and -535-E4 more than once. Aircraft comes in for heavy maintenance, they drop the engines and send them off to overhaul, then install whatever type they have a pair of handy (I'm pretty sure intermix wasn't allowed so both engines would need to be the same type).

The pylons were structurally different for the two engine types. At one time BA a had a C powered aircraft with a cracked pylon and it was hoped that a replacement pylon could be bought surplus to AA their C to E mod programme but none could be found, presumed scrapped, so a costly and lengthy repair to the original pylon had to be carried out.

[DaveReidUK]

The pylons were structurally different for the two engine types.

That's interesting. I know the pylon differed between RR- and PW-powered 757s, as one might expect, but I'm surprised that Rolls and Boeing between them couldn't keep a common pylon across the 535 variants.

[rog747]

I think the E4 lump was quite abit heavier (4360 kgs) than the C engines (3750 kgs) - hence the pylon difference.

The E4 engine had the distinctive exhaust ducting (copied on the -524G & H applications for the RR 767-300 and RR 747-400)
RR using the more advanced -524 core as a basis, the company produced the 40,100lb - 43,500lb thrust RB211-535E4 which entered service in October 1984. While still not quite as efficient as the PW2037 it was more reliable and quieter.
In May 1988 when American Airlines ordered 50 757s powered by the -535E4 citing the engine's low noise as an important factor: this was the second time since the TriStar that Rolls-Royce had received a significant order from a US airline, and it led to the -535E4's subsequent market domination on the 757.

The -535E4 achieved 180-minute ETOPS approval on the 757 in 1990, and has since proved to be one of the world's most reliable large turbofan engines.
Rolls-Royce achieved its ambition of developing an engine with long on-wing life and low maintenance costs. Monarch Airlines had a 29,000 hour engine but the record is over 40,000 hours on wing.
Further upgrading of the -535E4 took place in the late 1990s to improve the engine's emissions performance, borrowing technology developed for the Trent 700.

In 2005 there was still scope to improve the -535E4 even further and there was some discussion to upgrade it with the Trent 500 core, which could give an 8% decrease in SFC. The economic life-cycle of the 757 fleet could be extended another 10 years if the SFC upgrade had gone ahead.
However approaching 2020 -
We still see many 757's remain in leading airline markets, and have somewhat seen a renaissance/reprieve from full retirements due to the 737 MAX grounding.

[tdracer]

In May 1988 when American Airlines ordered 50 757s powered by the -535E4 citing the engine's low noise as an important factor: this was the second time since the TriStar that Rolls-Royce had received a significant order from a US airline, and it led to the -535E4's subsequent market domination on the 757.

That's not quite true - the final order book for the 757 was split pretty much 50/50 between the PW2000 and the RB211-535. What was different was the spread - Pratt had a small number of customers who had a large number of 757s (United, Delta, and Northwest had well over half the 757/PW2000 fleet), while Rolls had a large number of customers, most of which had a small number of 757s. It took a long time, but Pratt finally got a handle on the PW2000 reliability issues (interestingly one problem was derated climbs - the engine was just fine at max climb, but derated climbs could set up a resonance in the compressor blades that could break a blade). In the late 1990s, United went over a million hours without a PW2000 shutdown - and when they eventually did have a shutdown, it turned out to be duff flight deck indication - the engine was fine.
Much of the noise problem with the PW2000 was during approach throttle movements, it tended to open the HP surge bleeds and they made a lot of noise (you could readily hear the sound of the bleeds opening if a 757 flew overhead a few thousand feet up).

[Airbubba]

Here's a nice series of 1983 articles on the birth of the 757 from the archives of the Seattle Times:

The Seattle Times: Making It Fly (http://old.seattletimes.com/news/business/757/)

[rog747]

Tdracer - many thanks for the PW engine history - In Europe most airlines, as you say, took RR but Condor took the PW engines on their -230's, and RR on their -330's

When I was at Monarch we had 3 757 with C engines then the 4th arrived fitted with E4's and the others were re-engined by summer 1985
We had huge problems that summer with AOG's due to many failures IIRC of the CSD or IDG , it was part of the starter motor/gearbox, anyway it was something like that!
- sorry memory fails here.
I think Sunstrand made the part and we occasionally had 3 or 4 757's AOG that summer...Sunstrand could not keep up with the demand for spares.

Re the AA order I think their ops into Orange Co. was pivotal in the 757 order?

Best R.