Flydc10 From Mexico, joined Aug 2004, 82 posts, RR: 0 Posted (8 years 2 months 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 11620 times:
Hey
I was just wondering why dosent Airbus lauch a plane that could be a good replacement for the 757, like an A321-300 a plane that has the same fuselage as the 321 and longer range like the 752, like something in the middle from the A321-200 and the A330-200.
Alberchico From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 2685 posts, RR: 0 Reply 1, posted (8 years 2 months 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 11601 times:
the airbus a321 is already superior to the 757. They could simply do a stretched version with increased range and that would be it.
short summary of every jewish holiday: they tried to kill us ,we won , lets eat !
BA380 From United Kingdom, joined May 2004, 1466 posts, RR: 9 Reply 4, posted (8 years 2 months 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 11489 times:
Alberchico - you say that the 321 could be stretched and the range extended to match the 757, but capacity-wise, the 321 is the same size, so it is only a question of range.
TeamREGAL From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 114 posts, RR: 0 Reply 5, posted (8 years 2 months 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 11487 times:
Quoting Alberchico (Reply 1): the airbus a321 is already superior to the 757. They could simply do a stretched version with increased range and that would be it.
I hope that was sarcasm because if it wasn't, your world is quickly going to turn upside down!
REGAL
You would dare to challenge me? .........Insanity!
The B757 is superior for longer medium and long haul flights due to its range, but the A321 is lighter and therefore offers more efficiency on medium and short hauls. It also offers better cargo loading capabilities and commonality with other A32X family members for many operators. Just look at the growing customer list for the A321, it speaks for itself. If there still were a market for the B757, Boeing wouldn't have closed the line, simple as that.
Contrails From United States of America, joined Oct 2000, 1818 posts, RR: 0 Reply 8, posted (8 years 2 months 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 11372 times:
The 757 can not be replaced with anything built by Airbus. When a replacement is found it will be built by Boeing.
Boeing Nut From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 10, posted (8 years 2 months 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 11344 times:
Alberchico,
You'd better have some kind of backup for that kind of statement. I'll even bet there are Airbus fans out there that would debate this. The 757 is just as comfortable flying 3900 nm missions as it is on 390 mn missions. It's flexibility is unprecidented in the industry.
And on a lighter note, is of course, much better looking.
Astuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 9142 posts, RR: 96 Reply 11, posted (8 years 2 months 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 11304 times:
You beat me to it Udo.
Can't see how 757 is a technological marvel and A321 is a load of c**p (even though I love 757 as an aircraft).
It also amazes me how people cannot see how products lives can be curtailed by a combination of pressure from below and from above.
747 is a good example - because it is under pressure from 777/A340 below, and now A380 above, through no fault of the 747, it has migrated from being a mainstream product into having to squeeze into a niche between much more modern products.
Sound like the 757 at all?
Possibly the worst post I've read on this forum, SonicKidat wherever
Aa757first From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3338 posts, RR: 9 Reply 13, posted (8 years 2 months 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 11298 times:
Also remember that the A321 has a much longer take-off run. America West, a huge Airbus customer, didn't order the A321 because they were worried that it would have trouble departing LAS and PHX on a hot day, which of course are quite frequent in that region.
Udo From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 14, posted (8 years 2 months 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 11256 times:
Quoting Contrails (Reply 10): The 757 can not be replaced with anything built by Airbus. When a replacement is found it will be built by Boeing.
Why have important B757 operators then switched to A321 and why has Boeing stopped production?
Quoting Boeing Nut (Reply 13): And on a lighter note, is of course, much better looking.
True, but totally irrelevant for airlines.
Quoting Boeing Nut (Reply 13): The 757 is just as comfortable flying 3900 nm missions as it is on 390 mn missions. It's flexibility is unprecidented in the industry.
Many operators simply don't need the range. So goes the flexibility argument.
Quoting Gkirk (Reply 15): The 321 may have slightly better operating costs, but when it comes to perfomance, nothing beats the 757.
It's a question of what you regard as performance.
ERJ170 From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 6626 posts, RR: 19 Reply 15, posted (8 years 2 months 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 11188 times:
Uhmm.. isn't the 787-300 a replacement for the 757 in sorts.. I mean, they are somewhat the same as far as seats and range... but the 783 is more efficient and has better technology.. why keep the 757 open when you have a new aircraft ready to take it's place?
As far as 321 vs 757.. the 321 is a newer aircraft that is lighter.. but even after retirement, the 757 is still a hot aircraft with several airlines looking for 2nd hand aircraft..
I wouldn't be surprised if US doens't pull theirs back from the desert (if they are still there and if they are still in US possession) once/if they get back into good financial standing...
Leelaw From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 16, posted (8 years 2 months 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 11079 times:
There's no question the A321 is marginally more fuel efficient than the 752 on short to medium haul routes from airports which don't require high performance takeoff and landing capabilities. However, in terms of mission versatility, adaptability, and flexibility, the 752 is the winner hands down.
Gkirk From UK - Scotland, joined Jun 2000, 24621 posts, RR: 58 Reply 17, posted (8 years 2 months 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 11034 times:
Quoting Udo (Reply 16): Don't tell me there's no demand for a 180-220 seater.
The fact that Airbus virtually give them away helps as well
Quoting Udo (Reply 17): It's a question of what you regard as performance.
Take-off and landing performance is an area where the 757 clearly beats the 321, which struggles at airports with shorter runways due to brakes overheating etc, and the fairly long take-off run of the 321 compared to the spritely 757
When you hear the noise of the Tartan Army Boys, we'll be coming down the road!
Gigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16215 posts, RR: 88 Reply 18, posted (8 years 2 months 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 11008 times:
Clearly, a replacement isnt needed. If it were, Boeing would still be selling the 757.
The market doesn't want a 757 replacement.
Quoting ERJ170 (Reply 19): I mean, they are somewhat the same as far as seats and range...
No, they aren't. The 7E7-3 seats 300 in two classes, while the 757 seats between 185 and 200 in 2 classes.
Drerx7 From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 4906 posts, RR: 9 Reply 19, posted (8 years 2 months 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 10956 times:
Major 757 operaters have not switched to 321s--if they have they clearly did so because their demands did not require an aircraft as capable as the 757--and/or fleet compatibility. The 321 isn't exactly setting the sales charts on fire--like a previous poster said--there is no need for a 757 replacement, as there are second hand variants still available.
Singaporegirl From Singapore, joined Oct 2000, 302 posts, RR: 10 Reply 20, posted (8 years 2 months 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 10967 times:
the b757 is without a doubt one of the most beautiful birds out there! too bad that sq didn't keep the b757s for too long and replaced them with the a310s. does anyone know why they were being replaced so quickly by sq (this happened way before i started flying for sq)?
UAMAYBACH1239 From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 221 posts, RR: 0 Reply 21, posted (8 years 2 months 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 10952 times:
The B757 is superior for longer medium and long haul flights due to its range, but the A321 is lighter and therefore offers more efficiency on medium and short hauls. It also offers better cargo loading capabilities and commonality with other A32X family members for many operators. Just look at the growing customer list for the A321, it speaks for itself. If there still were a market for the B757, Boeing wouldn't have closed the line, simple as that.
Regards
Udo
I dont think there was a loss of market for the 757 due to competition from Airbus. Just as it was mentioned in another thread, the 757 would be between the 737-8-900 and the 7E7 which would result in the same outcome as with the 747.
WingnutMN From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 588 posts, RR: 0 Reply 24, posted (8 years 2 months 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 10900 times:
I have a couple questions.....First
NW and UA are probably the 2 biggest Airbus customers.....Why don't they fly A321's but have 757? Especially NW???
Cargo question- What is the difference in cargo capacity between these two planes. I don't believe I have ever seen a cargo outfit flying A321 (not say they don't), but I have seen 757 (UPS). If cargo was a big issue, NW would be flying A321 instead of 757 because cargo is a huge business and operation for them.
Performance questions- The 757 has always been know for its steep climbs and ability to get to its cruise altitude in a very short time, what is the speed, time and distance for the A321? Also, what are the service ceilings for the two planes and Normal and Max cruise numbers?
Just some ??? for you nutters out there!
WingnutMN
Any landing you can walk away from is a good landing! It's a bonus if you can fly the plane again!!
25 Gkirk: I believe MyTravel actually have 233 in their 757s
26 FriendlySkies: This thread is ridiculous... They are both good at what they were designed to do. Honestly, the 757 and A321 ARE NOT direct competitors. Look at the n
27 Boeing Nut: The most accurate quote so far in this post. Many don't, but some do. Re-enter the flexibility arguement.
28 777gk: The 757 is a FAR more capable airplane, and Airbus has not to date produced an aircraft which even approaches the scope of missions the airplane is su
29 Danny: Answering the question some of you asked: A321 is superior in what is the most important now- the economy. By lower fuel consumption and commonality w
30 DAYflyer: There will be a 757 replacemnt from Boeing-not Airbus. It is already in the works, the 737-900X. This aircraft is far more efficient for most routes a
31 Crosswind: For most missions the A321 is a very good B757 replacement. The aircraft has almost the same seating capacity, but is significantly lighter, and burns
32 Milan320: In terms of economics of the A321, some informatio was provided by LongHauler (an Airbus pilot) in the tech ops forum. This link should take you to hi
33 Boeing Nut: Crosswind, Very nice post sir. Welcome to my respected users list. Boeing Nut.
34 ConcordeBoy: ...to suggest that the A321 "finished off" the 757 per se, is laughable at best.
36 QFA001: Others have raised some good and some dubious arguments. I will raise two more: The A320 wing. This is the wing that the A321 inherited. It was too s
37 Udo: First, the B787-3 cannot take the B757's role. Second, the aircraft is still some years away. No doubt about that. It depends on where the aircraft i
38 FLY2LIM: I'd say the thread managed exactly what the original poster wanted to avoid.
39 DeltaMD11: Crosswind, I'd like to take a second to thank you for your post. Probably the nicest thus far of the thread. I would like to remind you of something t
40 Udo: The B757 was available much earlier and got significant orders from US carriers. Plus, when they ordered it, they needed the range. Being large Ameri
41 Starlionblue: If airlines still wanted to buy a plane with the characteristics of the 757, Boeing would still be building it and/or Airbus would build a similar ai
42 UAMAYBACH1239: Really? Just look at all the A321 operators and you will soon identify quite a number of former potential B757 candidates. The airbus is somewhat a se
43 Udo: No it's not. It has more range, but is less fuel efficient on medium and short hauls. It may be cheaper, but it's more fuel efficient because it weig
44 Leelaw: IMO, the 757 is much akin to the DC-3. It will be hauling cargo long after contemporary aircraft, particularly the A321, have been recycled into pop c
45 Cleared2Land4: I think Airbus should. The 757s are getting old.
46 TWA902fly: you try to get an A321 from ORD to ANC... or DTW-ANC or HNL-SFO or BOS-LAX TWA902
47 Iberia340600: Too late! It is inevitable. The die hard Boeing fans will always say Boeings are superior and the die hard Airbus fans will always say Airbus is supe
48 QFA001: I would like to note that I made an error, here. The division should have been made over something closer to 11-yrs. Therefore, the average rate is a
49 SWISSER: Since I did not already see it, (not to start a war, just 5 strong facts over the 752!) *A321 is a digital fly by wire aircraft with 1 hydraulic syste
50 RJ111: Why don't they fly A321's but have 757? Especially NW??? you try to get an A321 from ORD to ANC... or DTW-ANC or HNL-SFO or BOS-LAX Look, we all know
51 FriendlySkies: BS. The 757/767 have a shared type rating, just like A32X. The 757 program was a spin-off of the 767, and they were developed in tandem. Systems are
52 RJ111: BS. The 757/767 have a shared type rating, just like A32X. The 757 program was a spin-off of the 767, and they were developed in tandem. Systems are t
53 FriendlySkies: And I'm saying they don't. I'd like to know where the "more" commonality lies.
54 QFA001: I think you limited your point to just the cockpits, right? Afterall, the A32X has a same cockpit rating and the B757/767 has a common cockpit rating
55 Lightsaber: First: Udo, know that there is someone on this side of the atlantic who looks for and appreciates your posts. The A321 has a definitive issue in the U
56 777ER: Which is what the B757 is famous for, as well as being able take off from small airports B787-3
57 Udo: So what? Most B717s went to one large customer. Very good example... And the current A321 order backlog is not fixed, can increase any day. Of course
58 Iwok: i.e. see below: Please provide a comparison. Are you saying that the 757 has none of these? Regarding commonality with other Airbus aircraft, it is p
59 Keesje: I think there will be a A322 as part of a 320 NG series to fill the gab left by the 757, 762 and A310. We discussed before: http://www.airliners.net/d
60 Udo: After Gkirk's weak statement, that was an appropriate question. He was the one who aimed at stirring up the discussion. But it's an argument to point
61 QFA001: It's a great example. The B717 sales were horrendous. Just about everyone agrees on that. Yet, faced with the reality that Airbus has sold just 62 A3
63 WunalaYann: Er, now you know your destiny is not in your hands...
64 Udo: Yes, I said "so what" because your example does not weaken my basic statement that the demand for A321 went up in the near past (unlike demand for B7
65 QFA001: Are you blind, man? Here it is, one more time: Airbus has sold 62 A321s in the past five years. In fact, since the end of 2001, Airbus has sold a lon
66 UAL747-600: QFA001, I just wanted to say that I enjoy reading your posts here and in the orders group (I think I see you post there;
68 RJ111: In fact, since the end of 2001, Airbus has sold a lone A321. Didn't VN order 10 recently?
69 QFA001: I forgot the word 'net'. Airlines have been switching A321s to other variants. Airbus finished 2001 with 415 A321 sales and they now have 416.
70 Thrust: Alberchico, the A321 is absolutely positively not a 757 replacement. It can carry more passengers than a -200 on high-density routes, but simply canno
71 Iwok: QFA, sorry for the confusion. This thread has been pretty good reading, and there were lots of extended replies and posts, so I got all mixed up . Yo
72 Udo: Oh, then we must have had some ghost orders by AT, IB, ME, NK, QR, TA, SU, TK, VN... It's true, total sales are not impressive. But the difference is
73 Gkirk: An A321 cant carry more pax than the 757-200. A321 = 220 max B752 = 239 max B753 = 280 max
74 Doona: Whoever wants to strech the A321 should know that the A/C would need an all-new wing to cope with the extra weight. Better to get a whole new A/C, to
75 QFA001: No problem-o, man. Do you even want me to point out the obvious about gross vs net? Also, would you like me to point out that your list of new operat
76 Zvezda: I've been told by Airbus that the A321 is the longest varient of the A320 that the wing can support. To make it any longer would require a reduction i
77 Udo: You said "Airbus has sold a lone A321 since 2001". I didn't read anything about gross or net. There aren't really many which dropped out in the past
78 SWISSER: It is only a fact that today I can fly a 321 and tommorow the 340 wich is much easier to achieve and train for than switching from a 757 to a 777 in
79 Pe@rson: Hear, hear! That is my first, and only, input in this thread.
80 SWISSER: I think too! the market for the A321 and 757 is quite similar and also different! The greatest market for them is in my opinion the high yield charte
81 SWISSER: What about the new aircrafts with replaceble wings, or an extension they can add at the wingtip? That would be interesting!
82 Cumulonimbus: UDO, though it seems you are defiantly pro Airbus, I must say that in most of your threads you base your opinions on fact not Fiction. I am mainly a B
84 Brons2: Ergo, the 757 engines, especially the RB211, are really in a different thrust class. The RB211 also powers the L1011 and the 747! I'd be interested t
85 SWISSER: Just looking at the mountain on the ND and fly next to it is less economic and much safer I suppose?
86 Brons2: sigh. The 757 has TCAS and GPWS. Nobody disputes that it's an excellent climber. What more do you want? (A joystick and some pretty screens, I guess)
87 SWISSER: indeed a TCAS somewhere in the VS display the size of a tennisball. I said a full TCAS system. And in conditions like this you don't solely rely on a
88 SWISSER: you are absolutley right, I'am not saying that it's not! The 757 is indeed an exellent climber!
89 QFA001: No kidding!? Demand analysis is obviously not your forte. How many freakin' times do you want me to say it? A-I-R-B-U ... You know what? I've had eno
90 AirbusDriver: -The discussion on the GPWS is pointless The FAA is making all ( Above a certain number of seat ) airliners upgrade to the EGPWS so both of them are g
91 ATCT: The 757 and A321 have there own ups and downs. The 75 is an excellent performer and climbs like a homesick angel. In this same function it burns more
93 Udo: That's indeed a good market. But I also expect demand in Asia to go up in that capacity category, airlines in India and China are growing fast - and
94 SWISSER: Conclusion for the topic starter; A nice A B match between A321 and B757!
Sponsor Message: 
From Mexico, joined Aug 2004, 82 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 2685 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From UK - Scotland, joined Jun 2000, 24621 posts, 
From Singapore, joined Oct 2000, 302 posts, 
From Finland, joined Jan 2005, 226 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
