Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Tech Log
Reload this Page >

B757NG instead of 737 MAX?

Wikiposts
Search

Notices
Tech Log The very best in practical technical discussion on the web

B757NG instead of 737 MAX?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 20th March 2019 | 20:37
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 471
Likes: 31
From: Europe
B757NG instead of 737 MAX?

So, I have read that the 757 was a lot more expensive to operate than the 737. However, could a "757 NG" with modern engines and avionics be a possible replacement for the MAX?

I know the 757 is quite a bit heavier and has higher thrust engines than the MAX. But the fuselage cross section is the same as the 737 and the 757 was known to be overpowered so might actually work ok with the LEAP engines as a lower gross weight version. Pax capacity is similar between a MAX 9/10 and a 757-200.

What about the 757 would make it unsuitable as a basis for developing a future 737 replacement? I know it's a 1980's design and a conventional one at that but then again an A321 NEO is not exactly super modern either, in terms of the basic airframe.





733driver is offline  
Reply
Old 20th March 2019 | 21:01
  #2 (permalink)  
5 Anniversary
 
Joined: Mar 2019
Posts: 77
Likes: 15
From: Prague
I do not think so. Everyone has B737 in fleet. That means that everyone has pilots type rated to B737 and can use them on NG as well as MAX. Who has B757? And I do not think there is point of keeping alive this airframe. I would say that we will keep going with many NGs, MAX will returnone day and this will be over for 737. Then just completely new aircraft will come.
Rarife is offline  
Reply
Old 20th March 2019 | 21:15
  #3 (permalink)  
Community Builder
Community Influencer
10 Anniversary
 
Joined: Jul 2013
Aviation Qualifications: Non-Aircrew
Posts: 5,682
Likes: 3,347
From: Everett, WA
Originally Posted by 733driver
So, I have read that the 757 was a lot more expensive to operate than the 737. However, could a "757 NG" with modern engines and avionics be a possible replacement for the MAX?

I know the 757 is quite a bit heavier and has higher thrust engines than the MAX. But the fuselage cross section is the same as the 737 and the 757 was known to be overpowered so might actually work ok with the LEAP engines as a lower gross weight version. Pax capacity is similar between a MAX 9/10 and a 757-200.

What about the 757 would make it unsuitable as a basis for developing a future 737 replacement? I know it's a 1980's design and a conventional one at that but then again an A321 NEO is not exactly super modern either, in terms of the basic airframe.
The tooling and production line no longer exists - it was scrapped ~15 years ago. It would cost nearly as much to recreate the 757 production line and all the associated tooling as to simply design and produce a new aircraft (which is what the MMA is intended to be).
tdracer is offline  
Reply
Old 20th March 2019 | 22:55
  #4 (permalink)  
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 2,166
Likes: 86
From: Planet Earth
Too late now


The proposed 757NG would have been an outstanding aircraft to replace earlier models of the same type but in general it’s a bit big for a 737 replacement
stilton is offline  
Reply
Old 21st March 2019 | 04:28
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 508
Likes: 16
From: Under the sea
The first B757 flight was early 1982. So it was built with late 1970's technology.

It's time to move forward and leave the dinosaurs for the museums.
extreme P is offline  
Reply
Old 21st March 2019 | 06:42
  #6 (permalink)  
15 Anniversary
 
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 881
Likes: 68
From: UK
I do not think there are any current or new fuel efficient engines in the 43000lb thrust range - ?

The CFM Leap only goes to around 32000lbs afaik

The RB211 535E4 was a great engine then a jump to the Trent 500 (both now too guzzley on fuel)

The new 220-235 seat A321NeoLR with ACF and Leap engines is close to a 757 but not quite...
rog747 is offline  
Reply
Old 21st March 2019 | 07:34
  #7 (permalink)  
Community Builder
 
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 17,731
Likes: 2,105
From: Reading, UK
Even without the Max issues, we were just about due for the annual "why-don't-they-reopen-the-757-line?" thread to pop up.

I expect we'll still be haviing this debate in another 10 years' time.
DaveReidUK is offline  
Reply
Old 21st March 2019 | 09:37
  #8 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 471
Likes: 31
From: Europe
Originally Posted by tdracer
The tooling and production line no longer exists - it was scrapped ~15 years ago. It would cost nearly as much to recreate the 757 production line and all the associated tooling as to simply design and produce a new aircraft (which is what the MMA is intended to be).
Thanks for that info.
733driver is offline  
Reply
Old 21st March 2019 | 09:38
  #9 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 471
Likes: 31
From: Europe
Originally Posted by DaveReidUK
Even without the Max issues, we were just about due for the annual "why-don't-they-reopen-the-757-line?" thread to pop up.

I expect we'll still be haviing this debate in another 10 years' time.
Fair enough. I suppose I could and should have done a search before posting.
733driver is offline  
Reply
Old 22nd March 2019 | 03:35
  #10 (permalink)  
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 2,166
Likes: 86
From: Planet Earth
Originally Posted by extreme P
The first B757 flight was early 1982. So it was built with late 1970's technology.

It's time to move forward and leave the dinosaurs for the museums.

By that standard the 737 line should all be parked, that design originated in the mid sixties ! It’s genetics are significantly older than the 757


While I think the 737 has been warmed over one time too many, the superbly engineered 747 and 767 are still going, certain types are so visionary they can be updated successfully for decades or even indefinitely like the C130
stilton is offline  
Reply
Old 22nd March 2019 | 04:34
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 508
Likes: 16
From: Under the sea
Interesting and valid observations.

I'll have to backtrack and say leave the out of production dinosaurs to the museums.
extreme P is offline  
Reply

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.