PPRuNe Forums - B757NG instead of 737 MAX?

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)

- Tech Log (https://www.pprune.org/tech-log-15/)

- - B757NG instead of 737 MAX? (https://www.pprune.org/tech-log/619670-b757ng-instead-737-max.html)

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.

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.

Quote:

Originally Posted by 733driver (Post 10425081)

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).

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

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.

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...

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. :O

Quote:

Originally Posted by tdracer (Post 10425125)

Thanks for that info.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaveReidUK (Post 10425402)

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. :O

Fair enough. I suppose I could and should have done a search before posting.

Quote:

Originally Posted by extreme P (Post 10425355)

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

Interesting and valid observations.

I'll have to backtrack and say leave the out of production dinosaurs to the museums. ;)