B-757 Replacement
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: In the twilight zone
Posts: 252
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
B-757 Replacement
Boeing finally takes note. We've been saying that for a long time here, the only replacement for the B-757 is the B-757.
Boeing Ponders Transcontinental Plane to Replace 757 - Bloomberg
Boeing Ponders Transcontinental Plane to Replace 757 - Bloomberg
Last edited by The Range; 15th Feb 2014 at 13:46.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Pasadena
Posts: 633
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It may be just superstition, but I choose where I can to fly on 757s. In preference to a 737NG or an A320, it has more power and performance. I equate this with an even smaller chance of me being involved in an accident.
Leaving Kona for LAX in a 757 is a less-than-half-a-runway experience. Leaving Hilo for LAX in a 738 seems to be a white knuckle ride. I appreciate the 737 is lower to the ground, but there's less room for comfort.
But when buying aircraft, who's going to allow an extra 40% of power and wing area per seat on all trips in order to get the extra range required on some? And if Boeing has gone to the trouble of designing the 788, surely they'd like to sell some of them with features missing at a discount to fit the niche rather than start work on a new machine to do the job.
Leaving Kona for LAX in a 757 is a less-than-half-a-runway experience. Leaving Hilo for LAX in a 738 seems to be a white knuckle ride. I appreciate the 737 is lower to the ground, but there's less room for comfort.
But when buying aircraft, who's going to allow an extra 40% of power and wing area per seat on all trips in order to get the extra range required on some? And if Boeing has gone to the trouble of designing the 788, surely they'd like to sell some of them with features missing at a discount to fit the niche rather than start work on a new machine to do the job.
shame they're late talking about it. Think it would a good military market as a tanker. The KC135 has been a good workhorse for many years and the right size for a lot of the job. The widebody replacements are too expensive on costs etc for the bulk of the job. In an era of fuel efficiency being everything a modern 757 able to do the long trips would beat anything else on costs and efficiency. But is there a big enough market to justify a launch ?
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Think it would a good military market as a tanker.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Ormond Beach
Age: 49
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by awblain
It may be just superstition, but I choose where I can to fly on 757s. In preference to a 737NG or an A320, it has more power and performance. I equate this with an even smaller chance of me being involved in an accident.
Leaving Kona for LAX in a 757 is a less-than-half-a-runway experience. Leaving Hilo for LAX in a 738 seems to be a white knuckle ride. I appreciate the 737 is lower to the ground, but there's less room for comfort.
Leaving Kona for LAX in a 757 is a less-than-half-a-runway experience. Leaving Hilo for LAX in a 738 seems to be a white knuckle ride. I appreciate the 737 is lower to the ground, but there's less room for comfort.
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Edinburgh
Age: 39
Posts: 642
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Tupolev 204 is a fine aircraft, although the in flight entertainment system leaves a lot to be desired, no headphone sockets, just blaring music and films throughout the cabin but then perhaps that's just my experience. It was Air Koryo after all.
I was under the impression that the 787 was being at least partially heralded as the 757/767 replacement? It seems to be attractive to some of the long and thin routes previously associated with the 757 anyway.
I was under the impression that the 787 was being at least partially heralded as the 757/767 replacement? It seems to be attractive to some of the long and thin routes previously associated with the 757 anyway.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Los Angeles, USA
Age: 52
Posts: 1,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't really get it.
Seems like a lot of planes overlap this. Is there really a seating requirement between the smallest 787 and the highest capacity 737-900's, A321's and the coming Bombardier C300 and C500's? Seems to be plenty to choose from.
Seems like a lot of planes overlap this. Is there really a seating requirement between the smallest 787 and the highest capacity 737-900's, A321's and the coming Bombardier C300 and C500's? Seems to be plenty to choose from.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Pasadena
Posts: 633
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Adam, I'd say that it's not about number of seats, but more about how far those seats can be carried.
The 757 is substantially more powerful, with a 40% bigger wing, and goes substantially further with a similar same number of seats as a 737 or A321.
As such, it's substantially more expensive to run.
The 757 is also a lot smaller and less powerful than a 787, with only about 60% of the wing area.
The 757 is substantially more powerful, with a 40% bigger wing, and goes substantially further with a similar same number of seats as a 737 or A321.
As such, it's substantially more expensive to run.
The 757 is also a lot smaller and less powerful than a 787, with only about 60% of the wing area.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Auckland, NZ
Age: 79
Posts: 722
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From a purely pax point of view, the problem with the 737 cabin is it's so narrow. I'm a lot fatter now than I was 30 years ago, but so are most other people, and it's got to the point that I will somewhat actively choose to travel on the A320 rather than a 737, even though there's not that much difference in room. At some point, presumably, comfort of aircraft shows up a little bit in the economics?
Went to Warsaw a couple of years ago with LOT; Emb 195 outbound/737 inbound. The 195 seemed roomier than the 737 due to it 4 abreast seating., even though it was actually a lot narrower.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: netherlands
Age: 56
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
During the rest of this decade you'll see Airbus clean Boeings clock with the A321 CEO and NEO. The 737-9(00) doesn't cut it. Apparently this has sunk in Boeing HQ and they are dusting off old business cases.
Join Date: Oct 1998
Location: CGK to HKG
Posts: 249
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dusty -900ER
Is that why Lion Air has placed a mega order for the Airbus after receiving their numerous B737-900ER type - now dusty in the Boeing board room perhaps with too little power to ever really compete against the B757 on performance, just seats!
TW
TW
Is that why Lion Air has placed a mega order for the Airbus after receiving their numerous B737-900ER type - now dusty in the Boeing board room perhaps with too little power to ever really compete against the B757 on performance, just seats!
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: netherlands
Age: 56
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airbus has been weighing a bigger wing on the A321 for more then 15yrs. E3-4 Billion and 4 yrs in my estimations. The PW1100 can go to 40k lbs.
Could force Boeings hand IMO.
Could force Boeings hand IMO.
Join Date: Oct 1998
Location: CGK to HKG
Posts: 249
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dusty -900ER
Hahaha Dave....Indo..
Keesje, I hope that concept is not fitting those old tired CFMI engines, same rating as the A340 with too little egt margin left and on an ETOPS aircraft??
TW
Keesje, I hope that concept is not fitting those old tired CFMI engines, same rating as the A340 with too little egt margin left and on an ETOPS aircraft??
TW
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: netherlands
Age: 56
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tinwacker for some reason airlines prefer the V2500's for A321 over the CFM56s.. Anyway new variants of the A321 would have the PW1100 and LEAP engines currently under development for the A320 NEO series. Pratt is making a major come-back!
