Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

Boeing Considers Developing a 757-PLUS Instead of New Mid-Market-Airplane Dubbed 797

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

Boeing Considers Developing a 757-PLUS Instead of New Mid-Market-Airplane Dubbed 797

Old 11th May 2020, 22:02
  #41 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: on a beach
Age: 64
Posts: 343
Originally Posted by Pugilistic Animus View Post
I think that the main issue with a COMBI is smoke abatement and fire suppression
But I think that's the same with any cargo airplane. Correct me if am wrong.
beachbumflyer is offline  
Old 11th May 2020, 22:19
  #42 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: The No Transgression Zone
Posts: 2,265
Originally Posted by beachbumflyer View Post
But I think that's the same with any cargo airplane. Correct me if am wrong.
It's the same and it's different at the same time. The airplane must pass the certification process for carrying cargo but it's very difficult to certify a COMBI due to proximity to the passengers and some of the procedures to starve fires of oxygen would be quite deleterious and ultimately fatal
Pugilistic Animus is offline  
Old 11th May 2020, 22:23
  #43 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Everett, WA
Age: 65
Posts: 2,882
Originally Posted by Pugilistic Animus View Post
It's the same and it's different at the same time. The airplane must pass the certification process for carrying cargo but it's very difficult to certify a COMBI due to proximity to the passengers and some of the procedures to starve fires of oxygen would be quiet deleterious and ultimately fatal
Further, while they don't talk publicly about it much, the regulators treat cargo operations as more 'expendable' than passenger operations. Examples being the different treatment of Li batteries, and the exemption of cargo aircraft with more than two engines from the requirements of EDTO.
As a result, the fatal accident rate of cargo operations is significantly higher than it is for passenger operations.
tdracer is offline  
Old 12th May 2020, 00:38
  #44 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 5,333
Originally Posted by tdracer View Post
Further, while they don't talk publicly about it much, the regulators treat cargo operations as more 'expendable' than passenger operations. Examples being the different treatment of Li batteries, and the exemption of cargo aircraft with more than two engines from the requirements of EDTO.
As a result, the fatal accident rate of cargo operations is significantly higher than it is for passenger operations.
I don't argue with your safety statistics but;

I don't like your examples. Association does not equal causation

There are plenty of other contributing factors that might be considered in the actual causal chains,
lomapaseo is offline  
Old 12th May 2020, 02:00
  #45 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Everett, WA
Age: 65
Posts: 2,882
Loma, I'm not talking cause and effect, I'm pointing out evidence that the regulators apply a different standard of safety to cargo operations than they do to passengers. Why else would the rules be different - and they are different as pointed out by my two examples.
tdracer is offline  
Old 12th May 2020, 03:10
  #46 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: ex EGNM, now NZRO
Posts: 448
Originally Posted by tdracer View Post
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.
I think you missed one little aspect; I once travelled on an A319 operated by Air Canada, with atrocious seat pitch. At one point the queue for the toilets, both at the rear, was 50% the way down the aisle. Had the seat pitch allowed 20 less seats this issue would have been better. Post Covid will be see better seating? Here's hoping
Anti Skid On is offline  
Old 12th May 2020, 17:33
  #47 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Teesside
Posts: 484
Originally Posted by Turbine D View Post
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...
The same in the "75" in certain crosswind conditions. I once nabbed the final seat on a Manchester Shuttle when on a staff ticket, the aisle on the last row, and watched the window pillar in the cockpit move from side to side as we bumped and crabbed onto 06 at Manchester. Interesting views with that cockpit door wide open. It was a while ago...

My former boss at SAS, Willie Mason, used to work on traffic at Prestwick, and mentioned that crews were asked not to park with the nose wheel at an angle on a DC8-63 as occasionally certain doors wouldn't open.
Midland 331 is offline  
Old 12th May 2020, 23:24
  #48 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: cowtown
Posts: 93
Zone loading is now the norm . That should cut loading time down . Not quite as quick as playing music and telling everyone grab a seat when the music stops , preferably you own seat Joe ! . We have all played that game and would make last person seated buy the rest of the pax coffee

Modern computer Zone Loading and music would help . I would suggest dance music like
Manu Debango Soul Makossa . Or the Jeopardy theme would get people moving .
A good theme music might bring some joy back into the journey process .

Zone Loading saves time .
fitliker is offline  
Old 15th May 2020, 07:53
  #49 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: London
Posts: 513
Agree about zone loading. Even better if you also load from the back as the locos do, but also KLM at AMS through airbridges. A lot of 753s are used on longer routes likes West Coast to Hawaii where loading times are less important.

The DC8 60s series were good aircraft from a cost viewpoint. The obvious way forward was to replace four engines with two more efficient ones, which gives you, err, the 753. There's a definite comfort gain in having twin aisles though.
Peter47 is offline  
Old 15th May 2020, 09:18
  #50 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Freedom Sound
Posts: 246
Twin aisles, Zone boarding and also make use of the rear doors too, all of which ought to be a minimum design feature. If it saves time and makes pax on/off more efficient then that is a bonus as well.
esscee is offline  
Old 15th May 2020, 20:38
  #51 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Northumberland
Posts: 5,156
777-300 is a lot longer than a 757-300 - granted a greater proportion of premium seats and mainly long haul so turnround times less critical, but can't see that being a twin aisle makes that much difference to loading/unloading speeds?
SWBKCB is offline  
Old 15th May 2020, 21:45
  #52 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 11,883
Originally Posted by SWBKCB View Post
but can't see that being a twin aisle makes that much difference to loading/unloading speeds?
Gosh, that's going to be a tricky one to explain.
DaveReidUK is online now  
Old 15th May 2020, 22:54
  #53 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Netherlands
Age: 42
Posts: 203
Originally Posted by DaveReidUK View Post
Gosh, that's going to be a tricky one to explain.
Not really: Fewer seats per aisle. A 737 has 6, a 767 has 3.5 (2-3-2).
procede is offline  
Old 15th May 2020, 23:15
  #54 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Everett, WA
Age: 65
Posts: 2,882
Originally Posted by procede View Post
Not really: Fewer seats per aisle. A 737 has 6, a 767 has 3.5 (2-3-2).
Pretty sure DR was being sarcastic...
tdracer is offline  
Old 17th May 2020, 01:14
  #55 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Tent
Posts: 576
Is now not the perfect time for Boeing to come up with a complete new family of aircraft?

Selling any new aircraft in the next few years in any numbers will be pretty tough.
The government will not let it fail.
The MAX has issues.
The 747 is pretty much over.
They lack a small regional aircraft.

A complete new series of clean sheet aircraft with much in common could be a long term win & it could be possible to meet the regs for comi configurations on a clean sheet.
Bend alot is offline  
Old 17th May 2020, 07:09
  #56 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Northumberland
Posts: 5,156
Originally Posted by procede View Post
Not really: Fewer seats per aisle. A 737 has 6, a 767 has 3.5 (2-3-2).
United 757-300 has about 35 rows of 3-3, EK operates 777-300 with about 35 rows of 3-4-3? So is the 757-300 really too long?
SWBKCB is offline  
Old 17th May 2020, 07:44
  #57 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Under a Rock
Age: 51
Posts: 78
Originally Posted by Bend alot View Post
Is now not the perfect time for Boeing to come up with a complete new family of aircraft?

Selling any new aircraft in the next few years in any numbers will be pretty tough.
The government will not let it fail.
The MAX has issues.
The 747 is pretty much over.
They lack a small regional aircraft.

A complete new series of clean sheet aircraft with much in common could be a long term win & it could be possible to meet the regs for comi configurations on a clean sheet.
I think the​ problem for Boeing is the cost; It was hoping to milk the 737 Max whilst recouping the last part of development for the Dreamliner and develop the 777X. It has some awful cost over runs on its military programmes​, so cash for a clean sheet was limited even before Covid19. Now with sales (probably) on the floor, need for government support just to carry on, the ability to develop a clean sheet design from resources available to them ain't gonna happen. The likely collapse in demand will put Airbus in the same spot, even though they don't have the same number of problem programmes that Boeing have.
​​​​​​Maybe in 3 years time things will be easier?

Wickerbill is online now  
Old 17th May 2020, 13:08
  #58 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: attitude is nominal
Posts: 879
On a positive note there is no revolutionary new engine available right now that would be required before starting any uber-competitive new design. So waiting five years or so for it to be ready will do no harm. At the same time oil is too cheap now to trigger much demand for more efficient new airplanes. There are just too many old ones available for cheap now and they will be during the next few years.

Last edited by Less Hair; 17th May 2020 at 19:34.
Less Hair is offline  
Old 17th May 2020, 14:02
  #59 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Netherlands
Age: 42
Posts: 203
Originally Posted by Less Hair View Post
On a positive note there is no revolutionary new engine available right now that would be required before staring any uber-competitive new design.
Geared turbofan?
procede is offline  
Old 17th May 2020, 19:32
  #60 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: attitude is nominal
Posts: 879
True but this is already available.
"We" would need something newer and better to top some A321neo with today's latest GTF and PIP by a few percent engine wise. Possibly something with huge bypass ratio and diameter? If a new engine can be integrated from scratch more efficencies will be gained. CFRP wings (maybe a high wing layout?) and fuselage and these new engines with some smart cockpit might make it work one day. I'd say before the late 2020s no new engine like the one needed will be available.
Less Hair is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.