Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
737NG With 757 Engines And Wing?  
User currently offlineJAM747 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 550 posts, RR: 1
Posted (8 years 4 months 2 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 4398 times:

Is it feasible or possible for a version of the 737 to have the 757 wings and/or engines so it can perform roles which the 737-900ER and A 321 cannnot? If I am not mistaken the 757, and 737 both share a similar fuselage derived from the 707. How different are the wings of the 757 from a 737NG ER? I know the 757 used RR or Pratt engines which might not currently be used on the 737. Since the 757 production was closed because of little or no orders maybe it might be more feasible to have this this hypothetical 737/757 hybrid on the same 737 line for a carrier who might need such a capability till Y1 comes out. The TU 214 is available with RR engines like the 757 now so maybe a version of the 737 could also which could be more marketable than the Tu 214. I am not sure if this has been discussed before. If Boeing was to do this might as well throw in the double wheel boggies.  Smile

12 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineA342 From Germany, joined Jul 2005, 4700 posts, RR: 3
Reply 1, posted (8 years 4 months 2 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 4359 times:

It would essentially be the same aircraft as before, maybe with a shorter fuselage. Makes no sense.


Exceptions confirm the rule.
User currently offlineKSUpilot From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 656 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (8 years 4 months 2 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 4314 times:

And what about ground clearance? The reason why the 737 has smaller engines is because they are the only thing that fit under the wing. The 757 sits higher off the ground than the 737...that is the main difference between the two.

User currently offlineAcidradio From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 1875 posts, RR: 10
Reply 3, posted (8 years 4 months 2 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 4314 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR

When the 757 was first designed, Boeing tried to shop around a "757-100", which would fit that bill. But, nobody took to it as the economics were not quite up to par. The -200 and -300 though, well, those have done alright.


Ich haben zwei Platzspielen und ein Microphone
User currently offlineGlareskin From Netherlands, joined Jun 2005, 1308 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (8 years 4 months 2 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 4240 times:

Isn't a 757 just a 737 fuselage with higher landing gear because of the bigger engines?


There's still a long way to go before all the alliances deserve a star...
User currently offlineAC320tech From Canada, joined Jul 2006, 197 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (8 years 4 months 2 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 4214 times:

Quoting Glareskin (Reply 4):
Isn't a 757 just a 737 fuselage with higher landing gear because of the bigger engines?

No, Its basically like (to an extent) the 737, 707, and 727. But its a totally different aircraft.


User currently offlineFlyDreamliner From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 2759 posts, RR: 15
Reply 6, posted (8 years 4 months 2 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 4182 times:

Quoting Glareskin (Reply 4):
Isn't a 757 just a 737 fuselage with higher landing gear because of the bigger engines?

The two share the same fuselage cross section (like say, A300 and A330). The nose, tail, wing boxes, verticle and horizontal stabilizers, and airfoils, as well as landing gear, share nothing in common between the two.

The 757 wing is a 15 year older design, and while it has fantastic lifting abilities (like the 276,000 lbs of 753), my suspicions are that the 73G wing may be slightly more efficient. Moreover, raked wingtip extensions, like those on 764 and 772LR/773ER over the 73G wing could provide the additional lift needed with negligible drag penalty. If they really wanted, they could sling the slightly less efficient, but more powerful CFM56-5C (you know it from the A342 and A343) which has demonstrated up to 36,000lbs of thrust, and is rated to a static 34,000lbs. That and raked wingtip extension, and you could pull a heavier plane, with more fuel, into the air leaving the 757, and it's late 70s/early 80s technology aside, and probably get better economics (given the 739's better structural efficiency vs 752).



"Let the world change you, and you can change the world"
User currently offlineWarreng24 From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 708 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (8 years 4 months 2 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 4164 times:

You will need a new landing gear assembly.

The RB211 and PW2000 engines are larger in diameter than the CFM56's.

One of the major issues with the 737 is how low it sits to the ground. The ground height is EXCELLENT in terms of maintenance and loading. The 737 was designed for the low-bypass turbofan engines, such as the JT8D.

When the 737-300 was developed, Boeing couldn't raise the aircraft much, so they had to ask CFM to design the engine to fit. You'll notice that the engine nacelle on the CFM56 on the 737 is flat on the bottom. This prevents the engine from being to low to the ground.

So, if you'd like to get 757 engines on a 737, you'll need a new landing gear to raise the aircraft up so the RB211 and PW2000 engines don't scrape on the ground.  Smile


User currently offlineN231YE From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (8 years 4 months 2 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 4067 times:

Quoting AC320tech (Reply 5):
No, Its basically like (to an extent) the 737, 707, and 727. But its a totally different aircraft.

Believe it or not, the 757 is supposed to be a "modernized 727," though I agree there is very little commonality between the two, other than the 3x3 seating.


User currently offlineDfwrevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 1001 posts, RR: 51
Reply 9, posted (8 years 4 months 2 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 4033 times:

Quoting FlyDreamliner (Reply 6):
The two share the same fuselage cross section (like say, A300 and A330).

They share the same upper fuselage diameter, but the lower fuselage is slightly wider and comes closer to a circular pattern.

Quoting N231YE (Reply 8):
Believe it or not, the 757 is supposed to be a "modernized 727,"

That's the role Boeing intended when they launched the aircraft, but it quickly grew into something far larger and heavier than the 727.

Once commonality with the 727 was no longer necessary, the program went into parallel with the 767 project.


User currently offlineDutchjet From Netherlands, joined Oct 2000, 7864 posts, RR: 56
Reply 10, posted (8 years 4 months 2 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 3868 times:

Its funny........so many think that if the 757 was back in production, or if a successor was developed (such as a hybrid suggested by this post) that the airlines would be rushing to order the type. The fact is that Boeing did everything it could to sell additional 757s and there was simply no interest from the airlines. US carriers are now using their existing 757 fleets differently...such as on tran-atlantic journeys, but they are simply redelopying assets. Many US domestic routes that were once flown by the 757 are now handled by 738s and A320s, freeing the 757s up for the transatlantic flights...being that some of the US legacy carriers have decided that international is more interesting than domestic flying, the 752s are ending up on the transatlantic services.....but its very unlikely that the airlines would be ordering additional 757s at this point in time if the type were still available.

The 757 is one of my favorites.....its a great and hugely versatile airplane, but it is time to move along.

Most expect that the largest and most powerful variants of the 737NG successor and A32X successor will match or exceed the capbilities of the 752....and will be much more effecient and offer low per seat operating costs. Until those airplanes are offered, the 739ER and the A321-200 will can cover most, if not all, missions flown by the 757.


User currently offlineGlareskin From Netherlands, joined Jun 2005, 1308 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (8 years 4 months 2 weeks 2 days ago) and read 3473 times:

Quoting Dutchjet (Reply 10):
757 are now handled by 738s and A320s

And don't forget the A321 comes close.

Quoting Dutchjet (Reply 10):
The 757 is one of my favorites

Mine as well. Sooo powerful!



There's still a long way to go before all the alliances deserve a star...
User currently offlineHAWK21M From India, joined Jan 2001, 31702 posts, RR: 56
Reply 12, posted (8 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 3413 times:

Wouldn't that be a Smaller B737-900ER.  Smile
regds
MEL



Think of the brighter side!
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...
A380 With Two Engines And Belly Fairing And Apu... posted Sat Dec 11 2004 08:21:40 by A380900
Why LH A332 With PW Engines And A333 With RR? posted Thu Nov 18 2004 12:04:06 by GoMEA
What Was So Wrong With 757 And 767? posted Wed Dec 15 2004 23:50:50 by A380900
Ups 757 With Pw Engines posted Tue Mar 30 2004 20:25:52 by Sfelix1978
Virgin Atlantic With 757? posted Fri Nov 10 2006 13:05:05 by Columba
SQ's Newest 773/ER With GE Engines Not RR Why? posted Wed Oct 4 2006 06:51:12 by DeltaJet757
767 With RR Engines - Why The Lack Of Orders? posted Mon Sep 25 2006 00:06:13 by 1337Delta764
Aeropostal With A 757! posted Wed Sep 20 2006 18:47:45 by 797
757-200 And MD-83 Join EZY Fleet posted Fri Sep 1 2006 20:34:13 by EZYAirbus
Site With Regs, MSNs And Further Plane Statistics? posted Fri Aug 25 2006 23:54:58 by Haggis79