Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
757 Line Ended.. Why?  
User currently offlineJamesbuk From United Kingdom, joined May 2005, 3968 posts, RR: 4
Posted (9 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 2690 times:

OK I dont quite understand why the 757 line was ended its a beautiful plane and if any the 747 should be ended because the 757 was selling well and the 747 is dying out and if they take it out now it will die on top. But anyway what was the pacific reason they took it out??


You cant have your cake and eat it... What the hells the point in having it then!!!
20 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineDeltaMD11 From United States of America, joined Dec 2002, 1701 posts, RR: 34
Reply 1, posted (9 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 2677 times:

The 757 order book had been completely exhausted to answer the question in the simplest way. It has lost a lot of ground to the 738/A321 in recent years and any large interest in the program was basically non-existant. Saying that the 747 should have gone before it is a bit ludicrous considering that the 747 order book is still rather healthy and Boeing can probably squeeze some more out of the program. I agree with you that the 757 is a beautiful aircraft, but airlines don't buy planes because they're beautiful (well, for the most part anyways).


Too often we ... enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought. - John Fitzgerald Kennedy
User currently offlineJamesbuk From United Kingdom, joined May 2005, 3968 posts, RR: 4
Reply 2, posted (9 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 2650 times:

i was badly misinformed about the 757 but another thing on the 747 i think the fact their bringing out all these 747 adv etc its just stupid and its time to let it go just like they have with the 757 and start delveloping there r+d money in smaller crafts like they say. but to be honest i think they should have kept the 757 and redevelop it eg HUD better IFE etc like they are with the 747


You cant have your cake and eat it... What the hells the point in having it then!!!
User currently offlineTavong From Colombia, joined Jul 2001, 836 posts, RR: 4
Reply 3, posted (9 years 5 months 2 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 2490 times:

Quoting Jamesbuk (Reply 2):
i was badly misinformed about the 757 but another thing on the 747 i think the fact their bringing out all these 747 adv etc its just stupid and its time to let it go just like they have with the 757 and start delveloping there r+d money in smaller crafts like they say. but to be honest i think they should have kept the 757 and redevelop it eg HUD better IFE etc like they are with the 747

Stupid? Well tha'ts not true the 747ADV will be the plane that fills the niche between 777-2/300-A340 500/600 and the A380, there is still a market for Airlines that need a big capacity aircraft but doesn't need an A380 in fact has said will be more a Niche Aircraft but it still has life ahead.

The 757 issue is a bit different if Boeing would decided that a hipotetical 757ADV could be made it would be in direct competition with the 737-800 and specially with the -900, just what happened with the 717 and 737-600, so For Boeing it was easier to decide to shut down the 757 line and make the 737NG lines stronger, i agree it is a beutifull and excellent plane but unfortunately business dictated the fate of the 757 line.

Gus
SKBO



Colombian coffee, the best...take a cup and you will see how delicious it is.
User currently offlineComeAndGo From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 1041 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (9 years 5 months 2 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 2451 times:

The 757 costs 20% more than the A321/738 and costs 20% more to operate than the newer a/c. The 757 was designed as a city hopper and long distance aircraft for thinner routes. Excet for some exceptions like Islandic air, the 757 was not used on long haul. Therefore the competition being 737-800 and A321, it seased to exist. Mainly AA cancelled all remaining orders. It took US carriers ten years to figure out that the A321/737-800 could do the same for 20% less. In Europe it cought on right away. But then some American carriers only buy American. The 737-800 was introduced in the last few years and that's when they got the message.

User currently offline2travel2know From Panama, joined Apr 2005, 3580 posts, RR: 4
Reply 5, posted (9 years 5 months 2 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 2457 times:

Just when CO is really pushing B757 transatlantic flights.
B737-700 may do SNN, DUB, BFS, GLA, EDI > EWR - but I doubt is ok for other Europe > EWR, CLE flights like a B757.



I don't work for COPA Airlines!
User currently offlinePanAm747 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 4242 posts, RR: 8
Reply 6, posted (9 years 5 months 2 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 2417 times:

Keep in mind, though, the 757 will be around for a LONG time. HP has discovered that the A321 is not very suitable for PHX and LAS routes (not as much take-off power in high heat), and they are flying some of the oldest 757's still flying. Whichever line number you are flying on, it is an overpowered hot rod, but it is not the fastest nor furthest flying.

The technology of the 757, while still modern, is not the most efficient. Boeing customers have more interest in an advanced jet (the 787) rather than the older planes. I would imagine used 757's are quite available, negating the reason for large number of new ones.

The 757 simply ran its lifespan (in terms of production), freeing up Boeing to produce the 787.



Pan Am:The World's Most Experienced Airline - P(oor) S(ailor's) A(irline): San Diego's Hometown Airline-Catch Our Smile!
User currently offlineYyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16307 posts, RR: 56
Reply 7, posted (9 years 5 months 2 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 2396 times:

Boeing made a number of mistakes with the 757 program:

1. The 753 was introduced 8-10 years too late.
2. The proposed 752ER was never marketed strongly and hence won no orders.
3. No effort was made to market a 753PF.
4. Boeing would not adjust price to win a Fedex 752F order.
5. Poor range on the 753 prevented transatlantic charter interest.

Any or all of these factors could have resulted in addl orders for the 757 program.



Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
User currently offlineCommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11752 posts, RR: 62
Reply 8, posted (9 years 5 months 2 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 2374 times:

Quoting ComeAndGo (Reply 4):
Mainly AA cancelled all remaining orders.

AA never cancelled any 757 orders with Boeing. In fact, in February 2002, AA received the 1,000th 757. AA ordered a total of 126 757s from Boeing and received all 126.


User currently offlineAdriaticus From Mexico, joined May 2004, 1137 posts, RR: 19
Reply 9, posted (9 years 5 months 2 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 2371 times:

The B757 is definitely an interesting study case: Technologically speaking, it was up to date (the last one delivered was a phase 4 certified a/c). It is powerful, reliable (over 1020 in service out of 1050 built), and market-desirable (leasing rates are comparatively very high for B757's). Yet, its parents let its own mutant older brother (the B738) to sacrifice him , just so the mutant could survive the attack of the A321...

Hmmm...

__Ad.



A300/18/19/20/21 B721/2 B732/3/G/8 B741/2/4 B752 B762/3/4 B772/3 DC8/9/10 MD11 TU134/154 IL62/86 An24 SA340/2000 E45/90
User currently offlineJwenting From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10213 posts, RR: 19
Reply 10, posted (9 years 5 months 2 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 2226 times:

Like it or not, Boeing (and others) aren't going to keep producing a product that doesn't sell just because you think it looks good...

Had you come forward in 2003 and ordered a few hundred of them Boeing would gladly have kept the production line going a bit longer.
As you didn't, Boeing kept building them until there were no more orders and then ceased production.

If they hadn't, they'd have ended up like Fokker who in the end had dozens of unsold aircraft sitting on their ramps but were completely out of money because all their resources had been put into building those aircraft which they had no customers for.



I wish I were flying
User currently offlineAeroWeanie From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 1610 posts, RR: 52
Reply 11, posted (9 years 5 months 2 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 2201 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Commavia (Reply 8):
AA never cancelled any 757 orders with Boeing.

I beg to differ. AA cancelled their entire initial order of 757s, but later came back and bought quite a few.


User currently offlineCommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11752 posts, RR: 62
Reply 12, posted (9 years 5 months 2 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 2180 times:

Quoting AeroWeanie (Reply 11):
I beg to differ. AA cancelled their entire initial order of 757s, but later came back and bought quite a few.

I apologize, you are correct, but in the context of ComeAndGo's post -- i.e., that AA cancelled orders late in the 757 program -- that is false. Once AA took delivery of their first 757 in July 17, 1989, they never looked back, ultimately ordering 126 aircraft and taking delivery of all 126.


User currently offlineContnlEliteCMH From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 1464 posts, RR: 44
Reply 13, posted (9 years 5 months 2 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 2133 times:

I think Boeing killed the 757 at just the right time. You see this all the time in other industries -- American car makers keeping a particular in production for far too long, or software makers refusing to accept that a once-emergent product has entered the commodity stream and has no pricing power.

The 757 had a long and glorious run, but there are nearly-suitable replacements already available, and whenever Boeing makes the 747NNG, there will be a perfectly suitable replacement.

Pulling the plug on the 717 is the right move, too. And also the 767, whenever that happens. You can't hang on to products too long. You lose your competitive advantage in terms of product and also your pricing power.

GM killed off Oldsmobile, which is something they should have done in 1990 when they first discussed it. This allowed them to streamline their product portfolio. Now if they could only get Saturd under control and give Pontiac a swift kick in the backside, they'd be making decisions as good as Boeing...

[Edited 2005-05-04 16:30:45]


Christianity. Islam. Hinduism. Anthropogenic Global Warming. All are matters of faith!
User currently offlineOrion737 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (9 years 5 months 2 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 2094 times:

There was life left in the 757. I see no other aircraft which does the same job as the 757 available on the market. The 321 does not do the same job as the 757, it has less range and carries less passengers besides it having poor field performance compared to the larger 757 which can get in and out of smaller airfields.

The 757 was invaluable for charter operators in Europe who could operate the aircraft on thin long haul routes as well as busier short/medium routes. It is great for getting in and out of places like Gibraltar with a full load (ask Monarch) something they cant achieve with the 321.


User currently offlineJAM747 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 550 posts, RR: 1
Reply 15, posted (9 years 5 months 2 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 2065 times:

Quoting Jamesbuk (Reply 2):
i think they should have kept the 757 and redevelop it eg HUD better IFE etc like they are with the 747

Certain versions of the all new 787 will take the place of the 757, so Boeing would rather invest their money in a plane that is gaining orders. I love the 757 too and wish there was still demand for it which if existed would certainly keep it going at least till the 787 came about.

Quoting Orion737 (Reply 14):
There was life left in the 757. I see no other aircraft which does the same job as the 757 available on the market. The 321 does not do the same job as the 757, it has less range and carries less passengers besides it having poor field performance compared to the larger 757 which can get in and out of smaller airfields.

The 757 was invaluable for charter operators in Europe who could operate the aircraft on thin long haul routes as well as busier short/medium routes. It is great for getting in and out of places like Gibraltar with a full load (ask Monarch) something they cant achieve with the 321.

I agree there are some unique qualities that separate the 757 from any planes available but how many airlines would buy them for strictly those reasons? The 757 has played important parts in making airlines profitable but again if there was enough demand for the 757 due to its unique qualities I think Boeing would still make it. Maybe the airline who need the the 757 unique qualities are few and would buy them used.


User currently offlineFutureATP From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 222 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (9 years 5 months 2 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 1974 times:

Just out of curiosity, what is the max payload in weight for the 757s and the 737ng/320 family?

My experience with HP in PHX was that the 757s never had to leave cargo behind. The 320s/319s were always weight restricted if they were going to the east coast and sometimes we would never get any cargo on.

And with the 737s, belly space would be an issue( I have only been in the bins of the-200s/300s). When fully booked, there just isnt much more room for cargo on the 737s.

My point is that the 757 may still have an advantage of the 737/320 families because of payload. At HP I have off loaded/loaded everything from seafood, automobile parts, spare tires for the aircraft, and even signs for a casino that were changing planes in PHX! Cant remember if it was to or from LAS.

I guess that the 757 may cost about 20% more to operate, but if a operator has an extensive cargo op also, the 757 could make up for it's extra fuel burn with cargo revenue the 737/320 may not be able to provide.

Also, the 757 seemed to have a generous CG(Center of Gravity) window. Where as the Airbuses(especially the 319) seemed to wanted to be loaded front heavy, and the 737s had to be around 50/50.(It has been a while, please correct me on this if I am wrong!)


User currently offlineConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (9 years 5 months 2 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 1930 times:

Quoting Yyz717 (Reply 7):
3. No effort was made to market a 753PF.

...while I agree with you on most of the others, I certainly wouldn't call this one a mistake!


User currently offlineAADC10 From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 2098 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (9 years 5 months 2 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 1896 times:

Quoting Yyz717 (Reply 7):
Any or all of these factors could have resulted in addl orders for the 757 program.

I think the main reasons for the demise of the 757 were more the canibalization of the market with the 738, as previously mentioned. It is more flexible to have commonality with the ubiquitous 737 than the less useful 757 commonality with the 767. The 737 pilots earn less pay too.


User currently offlineTavong From Colombia, joined Jul 2001, 836 posts, RR: 4
Reply 19, posted (9 years 5 months 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 1743 times:

Quoting Orion737 (Reply 14):
There was life left in the 757. I see no other aircraft which does the same job as the 757 available on the market. The 321 does not do the same job as the 757, it has less range and carries less passengers besides it having poor field performance compared to the larger 757 which can get in and out of smaller airfields.

In fact you're rigth with this issue, the 757 is a excellent aircraft with an excellent TO capabilities (no plane can TO from BOG has a 757 does) the A321 and Also the 737-800 can't match the capabilities of the 757 BUT in fact not much airlines need that extra capabilities has much has to choose a different plane, so the B757 needed to die (a shame tougth) in fact has said before, altougth the 757 is a great aircraft, Boeing would be affecting the 737 line (specially the 737-900 and the -900X derivative if i ever flies) keeping the 757 open, see B717/B736 has an example so i really don't think Boeing would be marketing two planes competing directly and hurting both programs. (and the 737-800 has being selling very well so imagine if Boeing doesn't decide to defend this plane)

Gus
SKBO



Colombian coffee, the best...take a cup and you will see how delicious it is.
User currently offlineJwenting From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10213 posts, RR: 19
Reply 20, posted (9 years 5 months 2 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 1661 times:

Quoting AADC10 (Reply 18):
Any or all of these factors could have resulted in addl orders for the 757 program.

In order to keep a production line profitable you don't just need orders, you need a particular volume of orders.
Maybe Boeing could have gotten orders for one or two aircraft a year, but that would mean them running the line at a loss.



I wish I were flying
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Aeromexico 757 ATL - Einn - Why? posted Wed Jul 6 2005 23:11:37 by Skibum9
Has 757 Production Ended? posted Tue Jan 4 2005 20:33:21 by 727LOVER
757 Exit Configuration- Why A Choice? posted Mon Dec 13 2004 21:13:06 by AA737-823
Speculation Topic - Restarting The 757 Line posted Fri Oct 29 2004 23:20:02 by Boeing nut
The Closed 757 Line posted Tue Oct 12 2004 02:30:35 by BoeingPride800
Who Likes The 757-200 And Why? posted Sat Aug 16 2003 06:25:20 by Kevin752
737's And 757's US - Europe... Why Not? posted Fri Feb 15 2002 14:56:48 by Jcxp15
Why Did The 757 Die? posted Wed Dec 6 2006 13:23:37 by Albird87
Why Is The 757 So Succesfull As A Cargoplane? posted Sat Dec 2 2006 14:01:43 by AbleToFly
Why 20 Years To Use The 757 As Intended? posted Tue Oct 10 2006 09:36:37 by N328KF