Boeing Considers Developing a 757-PLUS Instead of New Mid-Market-Airplane Dubbed 797
tdracer - I fully agree that it would need a brand new multimodel cocpit updated to modern standards and prepared for the future of more automation. The body sould also be a composite play like the 787.
However, using the 757 as a template would not only create a good looking plane, as some comments have agreed with, but probably shave a couple of years, and associated costs, of the development cycle by reusing some of the principals like aerodynamic shape and and landing gear. Something Boeing desperately needs at the moment.
Personally I don't agree with this trend for ever larger 737's for the bread and butter jobs of short haul flying. The 150 seat aircraft was a more versatile one that encouragede more direct routes and higher frequencies. However the larger planes have been encouraged by slot restrictions, airport fees and increasing pilot costs.
However, using the 757 as a template would not only create a good looking plane, as some comments have agreed with, but probably shave a couple of years, and associated costs, of the development cycle by reusing some of the principals like aerodynamic shape and and landing gear. Something Boeing desperately needs at the moment.
Personally I don't agree with this trend for ever larger 737's for the bread and butter jobs of short haul flying. The 150 seat aircraft was a more versatile one that encouragede more direct routes and higher frequencies. However the larger planes have been encouraged by slot restrictions, airport fees and increasing pilot costs.
What do the airlines want?
When will they be interested in buying new planes again and at what price to get 20 years out of them?
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Ireland
Posts: 216
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you will get 20 years out of them in the northern hemisphere is a different question. It will depend on how persistent the envirnmental question will be after CoVid19. What I see is they have got a taste for the clean air demonstrated with the considerable, albeit temporary, downshift in pollution lately. And the governments in some countries have had to compromise with the environmental parties to get agreement on economical covid measures. These future promises will come back and bite us.
Price level on delivery in 3-4 years: Lightly discounted (nobody think they got a good deal without some discount) ExMax-10 for same amount of seats. A bit more with more seats. Relatively less with less seats. Since brand new cockpit 1 simulator thrown in with every 30 planes.
I agree that the 757 can use a few inches more of cabin width. Just enough to beat Airbus by like an inch. I should be in charge of Boeing because I will try to resurect the 707 and 727 too
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Under a Rock
Age: 54
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Like magic this popped up on my message feed
interesting though.
https://simpleflying.com/boeing-757-300-too-long/amp/
interesting though.
https://simpleflying.com/boeing-757-300-too-long/amp/
Not sure about it being bollocks - particularly this bit:
I think this is what really hurt the 757-300 - it was simply too long for a single aisle. This made turn times horrible, and on-board service a nightmare - I sat near the back of a 757-300 one time, after we landed I timed it - it took 10 minutes after the door opened before there was even movement where I was sitting (I flew trans-Atlantic on a DC8-60 way back when - it had the same problem).
Direct operating costs per seat mile for the -300 were good, but it took so long to turn that it took a serious hit for productivity. Single aisle becomes problematic when you get much over 200 seats - twin aisle simply works better when you get much above 200 seats.
Additionally, it was disliked by passengers. Records show that it took up to eight minutes longer to board the Boeing 757-300 compared to the -200 series, thanks to the very long aisle. This same aisle meant that onboard service was incredibly slow, and passengers were waiting forever to be served.
Direct operating costs per seat mile for the -300 were good, but it took so long to turn that it took a serious hit for productivity. Single aisle becomes problematic when you get much over 200 seats - twin aisle simply works better when you get much above 200 seats.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Ireland
Posts: 216
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think this is what really hurt the 757-300 - it was simply too long for a single aisle. This made turn times horrible, and on-board service a nightmare - I sat near the back of a 757-300 one time, after we landed I timed it - it took 10 minutes after the door opened before there was even movement where I was sitting (I flew trans-Atlantic on a DC8-60 way back when - it had the same problem).
Direct operating costs per seat mile for the -300 were good, but it took so long to turn that it took a serious hit for productivity. Single aisle becomes problematic when you get much over 200 seats - twin aisle simply works better when you get much above 200 seats.
Direct operating costs per seat mile for the -300 were good, but it took so long to turn that it took a serious hit for productivity. Single aisle becomes problematic when you get much over 200 seats - twin aisle simply works better when you get much above 200 seats.
Even if you use airbridges occasionally you can still use the back door for unloading with stairs and back up again onto the airbridge.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Under a Rock
Age: 54
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tdracer makes a good point regarding turn times, but in almost every other respect the aircraft performance and economics are great. The 300 died with the entire 757 line in the depressed airline economics following 9/11. Not because companies, hated it; they weren't buying anything at the time. A bit like the next few years...
Whatever they come up with, it will have to be a wider cabin with 2 aisles, single aisle is not going to be the way forward. Maybe offset seat row positioning so it is easier to get in/out of seats. Plus we may see some more radical or spectacular designs.
Hey, why stop there. I can see a market for the return of the 307 Stratoliner.
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Middle America
Age: 84
Posts: 1,167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Should Boeing decide to lengthen the current 757, I hope they do a better structural design than Douglas did in lengthening the DC-8 to the DC-8-61. If you sat in one of the rearmost row of seats and the aircraft was experiencing moderate turbulence, it gave one the feeling the rear section was going to torque off from the sections more forward, it was so visibly noticeable. It scared the heck out of unknowing passengers...
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Should Boeing decide to lengthen the current 757, I hope they do a better structural design than Douglas did in lengthening the DC-8 to the DC-8-61. If you sat in one of the rearmost row of seats and the aircraft was experiencing moderate turbulence, it gave one the feeling the rear section was going to torque off from the sections more forward, it was so visibly noticeable. It scared the heck out of unknowing passengers...
Tdracer makes a good point regarding turn times, but in almost every other respect the aircraft performance and economics are great. The 300 died with the entire 757 line in the depressed airline economics following 9/11. Not because companies, hated it; they weren't buying anything at the time. A bit like the next few years...
Should Boeing decide to lengthen the current 757, I hope they do a better structural design than Douglas did in lengthening the DC-8 to the DC-8-61. If you sat in one of the rearmost row of seats and the aircraft was experiencing moderate turbulence, it gave one the feeling the rear section was going to torque off from the sections more forward, it was so visibly noticeable. It scared the heck out of unknowing passengers...
On the contrary, that built in flexibility was key to the strength of the airframe, better to bend than break
Look at the incredible longevity of the DC8 and you’ll realize Douglas got it right
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: England
Age: 65
Posts: 303
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's going to very difficult to predict what is going to happen on the passenger side of aviation, it is fairly safe to say that passenger volume will be down in the short-medium term; Other drivers are home working/massive take up of video-conferencing as an alternative to face-to-face meetings and concerns about travel on any form of public transport.
Efficient single aisle will be preferred to keep costs down as volume won't be there. 777 with 300/350 seats, it's efficient but how many seats need to be filled to break even? And that's assuming that social distancing won't apply to airlines.
UK is introducing a 14 day quarantine for international flights which is going to have a massive impact.
The aviation industry is going to contract and Boeing/Airbus will not have the cash flow to launch any new aircraft for a while. Doesn't look good for the Max, even if you were in the market for a new plane, would you buy?
Efficient single aisle will be preferred to keep costs down as volume won't be there. 777 with 300/350 seats, it's efficient but how many seats need to be filled to break even? And that's assuming that social distancing won't apply to airlines.
UK is introducing a 14 day quarantine for international flights which is going to have a massive impact.
The aviation industry is going to contract and Boeing/Airbus will not have the cash flow to launch any new aircraft for a while. Doesn't look good for the Max, even if you were in the market for a new plane, would you buy?
Google "Helderberg".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_...ays_Flight_295
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_...ays_Flight_295