Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Why No Continental 757-300's Across The Atlantic?  
User currently offlineGilesdavies From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2003, 2985 posts, RR: 2
Posted (7 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days ago) and read 13659 times:

I don't know much about the 757-300 or the number CO have in their fleet...

I was reading that the 757-300 hs a range of 3700nm, would this not make it possible to cover routes to Western Europe from their EWR hub?

Surely if CO were to take 777's and 767's off their major routes to destinations like LGW, MAD, CDG, AMS and wherever else the widebodies operate it would open these aircraft up for longer leg routes without much of a capacity drop.

I know ATA operate their 757-300's to SNN, BUD and a few other destinations?

[Edited 2006-11-29 14:39:59]

65 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineCOERJ145 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1421 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (7 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days ago) and read 13633 times:

Quoting Gilesdavies (Thread starter):
I was reading that the 757-300 hs a range of 3700nm, would this not make it possible to cover routes to Western Europe from their EWR hub?

Possible? yes. Likely, no. CO only has 17 753s, and they mainly like to use them to Florida, California, and other vacation destinations with a lot of traffic.


User currently offlineRJ111 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (7 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days ago) and read 13603 times:

The range with RB211-535E4Bs is 3395nms.

User currently onlineAV8AJET From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 1311 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (7 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 13504 times:

Also I believe with a full load of passengers and a bunch of fuel there wouldn't be a lot of room for cargo weight. Cargo is extremely important on alot of these European or international flights as a whole.


"To fly or not to fly there is no question!"
User currently offlineAKelley728 From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 2162 posts, RR: 5
Reply 4, posted (7 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 13389 times:

Quoting Gilesdavies (Thread starter):
I don't know much about the 757-300 or the number CO have in their fleet...

All of CO's 757-300s are in a domestic configuration with 24 domestic first class seats and 192 economy seats. All of CO's 757-200s are now in an International config with 16 BusinessFirst seats. All of the International 757-200s are in the process of being upgraded with an AVOD system.


User currently offlineNA From Germany, joined Dec 1999, 10365 posts, RR: 11
Reply 5, posted (7 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 13276 times:

A 757, even worse a 757-300, isn´t competitive on long haul. Too narrow, too cramped, and a nightmare on boarding. I´ve once flown to the US in a 757, I´ll never again do that.

User currently offlineUN_B732 From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 4289 posts, RR: 4
Reply 6, posted (7 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 13258 times:

CO makes big money on the 752s trans-atlantic, even if they are uncomfortable, bad, etc. etc.
I think cargo and using them for leisure markets are the two reasons 753s are not going across the pond. Maybe in the future, they will fly EWR-LGW or DUB. I imagine CASM would be fairly good
-Mr. X



What now?
User currently offlineCHRISBA777ER From UK - England, joined Mar 2001, 5964 posts, RR: 62
Reply 7, posted (7 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 13236 times:

Quoting NA (Reply 5):
A 757, even worse a 757-300, isn´t competitive on long haul. Too narrow, too cramped, and a nightmare on boarding. I´ve once flown to the US in a 757, I´ll never again do that.

I think airline management will disagree with you. LH may agree with you, but the wingletted '75 is a hugely impressive performer over the pond. CO, AY, US, AA, TCX, and soon NW all think so.

I dont think the '75 is any more or less cramped or uncomfortable than anything else on a six hour run, whether its transatlantic or not. Ive been on the CO 752 across the pond - very nice.



What do you mean you dont have any bourbon? Do you know how far it is to Houston? What kind of airline is this???
User currently offlineIAHERJ From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 677 posts, RR: 7
Reply 8, posted (7 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 13216 times:

Actually we have 2 configurations on the 757-300. 12 first and 210 coach as well as 24/192 like AKelly said.

IAHERJ



Actually flown: EMB-120 EMB-145 B717 B737 B757 B767
User currently onlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21098 posts, RR: 56
Reply 9, posted (7 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 13183 times:

Quoting AV8AJET (Reply 3):
Also I believe with a full load of passengers and a bunch of fuel there wouldn't be a lot of room for cargo weight. Cargo is extremely important on alot of these European or international flights as a whole.

Does the 752 have that much cargo capacity on transatlantics anyway?

Quoting AKelley728 (Reply 4):
All of CO's 757-200s are now in an International config with 16 BusinessFirst seats.

I was on two CO 752s (both with winglets) very recently, and it didn't look like they had BusinessFirst.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineAKelley728 From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 2162 posts, RR: 5
Reply 10, posted (7 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 13168 times:

Quoting NA (Reply 5):
A 757, even worse a 757-300, isn´t competitive on long haul. Too narrow, too cramped, and a nightmare on boarding. I´ve once flown to the US in a 757, I´ll never again do that.

You've been spoiled. How would you have survived the 707s and DC-8s that were doing long haul in the 60s and 70s?

Quoting IAHERJ (Reply 8):
Actually we have 2 configurations on the 757-300. 12 first and 210 coach as well as 24/192 like AKelley said.

I thought all of the 757-300s had been converted to 24/192?


User currently offlineDank From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 866 posts, RR: 16
Reply 11, posted (7 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 13156 times:

Quoting AV8AJET (Reply 3):
Also I believe with a full load of passengers and a bunch of fuel there wouldn't be a lot of room for cargo weight. Cargo is extremely important on alot of these European or international flights as a whole.

I can't imagine that the -200s are carrying much cargo. The -300 would only be useful for a couple of routes (due to range restrictions) and it woulnd't make much sense to configure a couple of -300s for that purpose, and lose their ability to swap them on domestic runs. In addition, they can swap 739s for many domestic routes that used 752s before, but they don't have anything that can match the 753.

cheers.


User currently offlineJetset7E7 From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2004, 1089 posts, RR: 16
Reply 12, posted (7 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 13127 times:

Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Reply 7):
LH may agree with you, but the wingletted '75 is a hugely impressive performer over the pond. CO, AY, US, AA, TCX, and soon NW all think so.

US and TCX to get retro fitted winglets?

Mark



Retrofitted Blended Winglets - The Future Is On The Wing
User currently offlineLTBEWR From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 12880 posts, RR: 12
Reply 13, posted (7 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 13104 times:

On reason may be that while CO's 757-300's may have that range under ideal conditions, you often don't have 'ideal' conditions. It isn't uncommon for example for 757's, including -200's designed for longer range, to have to make an intermediate fuel stop in Eastern Canada on westbound flights due to high fuel burn from stronger than usual jet stream headwinds on westbound flights. At other times, bad weather at destination airports (especially EWR) will cause landing delays and one needs enough reserve range and fuel for such delays. Such fuel stops can also screw up a landing slot as well as connecting flight schedules for the a/c or the pax as well as the additional costs of such stops.

User currently offlineCALMSP From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3843 posts, RR: 8
Reply 14, posted (7 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 13098 times:

yes, we have moved our 757-300s back to the 24/192 configuration. Our 753's that we took from Boeing are also not ETOPS equipped. Only the ATA 753s are. As for cargo on our atlantic 757-200s, we pack them deep. LIS actually sometimes sees 8000lb of mail stacked on board.


okay, I'm waiting for the rich to spread the wealth around to me. Please mail your checks to my house.
User currently offlineGilesdavies From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2003, 2985 posts, RR: 2
Reply 15, posted (7 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 12977 times:

Quoting NA (Reply 5):
A 757, even worse a 757-300, isn´t competitive on long haul. Too narrow, too cramped, and a nightmare on boarding. I´ve once flown to the US in a 757, I´ll never again do that.

Thats your opinion and the opinion of probably a lot of people on airliners.net. (Including mine, but I just trying to put this in the perspective of the airline!) The average Joe public they probably don't care as seat pitch/width is the same.

I have several friends who live close to BRS and BHX in the UK who have taken CO across and they have had nothing but praise for service. They were so thankful they could get a scheduled flight across the pond from their local airport and could avoid the hell hole what is known as LHR!

Why would it be more of a nightmare at boarding than it currently is on domestic flights?

Quoting UN_B732 (Reply 6):
I imagine CASM would be fairly good

Mr X - What does CASM mean to us mere mortals?  Wink


User currently offlineBeech19 From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 936 posts, RR: 4
Reply 16, posted (7 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 12872 times:

Quoting Gilesdavies (Reply 15):
Mr X - What does CASM mean to us mere mortals?

CASM - "Cost per Available Seat Mile"



KPAE via KBVY
User currently offlineMasseyBrown From United States of America, joined Dec 2002, 5215 posts, RR: 7
Reply 17, posted (7 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 12872 times:

Quoting NA (Reply 5):
A 757, even worse a 757-300, isn´t competitive on long haul.

Yes. To paraphrase Yogi Berra, nobody flies them anymore; they're too crowded.



Consilivm: Cave ne nothi te vexant
User currently offlineEWRCabincrew From United States of America, joined May 2006, 5523 posts, RR: 56
Reply 18, posted (7 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 12811 times:

All our 753s (17) have capacity of 24/192. Ships 851-859, 861, 863-869. They are used on non-Business/First markets. They won't be used on trans-Atlantic runs for scheduled service.

Also, as of this December, all of our 752s (41) will be wingleted and capacity of 16/159 with the new video system in place.

Now we wait for AVOD IFE in coach starting sometime next year. They are here to stay.



You can't cure stupid
User currently offlineBeech19 From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 936 posts, RR: 4
Reply 19, posted (7 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 12716 times:

Quoting NA (Reply 5):
A 757, even worse a 757-300, isn´t competitive on long haul.



Quoting MasseyBrown (Reply 17):
Yes. To paraphrase Yogi Berra, nobody flies them anymore; they're too crowded.

Well... good thing for Boeing the 757 was never intended for long haul eh? Long Medium at best... Even the 752 doesn't break the 5000nm range.

"Nobody flies them anymore" huh? Is that why they can't get enough of them now? Why so many are getting ETOPS added and winglets and doing many many international routes? I hardly think that nobody wants them anymore...

They are no more crowded than a 747 in coach or any other 17.2" seat...



KPAE via KBVY
User currently offlineMasseyBrown From United States of America, joined Dec 2002, 5215 posts, RR: 7
Reply 20, posted (7 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 12674 times:

Quoting Beech19 (Reply 19):
"Nobody flies them anymore" huh? Is that why they can't get enough of them now?

The Yogi Berra attribution didn't tip you off? Not even a hint?  worried 



Consilivm: Cave ne nothi te vexant
User currently offlineBeech19 From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 936 posts, RR: 4
Reply 21, posted (7 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 12523 times:

Quoting MasseyBrown (Reply 20):
The Yogi Berra attribution didn't tip you off? Not even a hint?

Oops... yeah i feel like an idiot right now. LOL

I was thinking "crowded" as in small... sorry my mind was on work...



KPAE via KBVY
User currently offlineNA From Germany, joined Dec 1999, 10365 posts, RR: 11
Reply 22, posted (7 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 12497 times:

Quoting AKelley728 (Reply 10):
You've been spoiled. How would you have survived the 707s and DC-8s that were doing long haul in the 60s and 70s?

I was to young back then and my parents didn´t take me on intercontinental flights. I would have preferred to cross the pond in the Queen Mary back then anyway!

Quoting Beech19 (Reply 19):
They are no more crowded than a 747 in coach or any other 17.2" seat...

But widebodies give a more spacious feeling as they are actually that, more spacious, the sides less bend, harming your feet, the baggage compartments less tightening head space, you can walk a bit what is almost impossible in a narrowbody.
And a widebody is more stable in flight. Nothing, absolutely nothing would make me choose a narrowbody on long-haul anymore.


User currently offlineBobnwa From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 6346 posts, RR: 9
Reply 23, posted (7 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 12447 times:

Quoting NA (Reply 22):
And a widebody is more stable in flight.

That's debatable.


User currently offlineDelta767300ER From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 2562 posts, RR: 12
Reply 24, posted (7 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 12275 times:

Quote:
Too narrow, too cramped, and a nightmare on boarding. I´ve once flown to the US in a 757, I´ll never again do that.

I am a huge Boeing 757 fan and enjoy my flights on them. However, I agree that they would get uncomfortable on longer flights (4+ hours). A widebody is more spacious and gives you the feel of not being in a cramped in a narrow tube.

-Delta767300ER


25 Post contains images Beech19 : A more spacious feeling doesn't change the fact that you still have a 17.2" x 31" box for yourself while sitting in a Y seat. If that slight bend in
26 DC10extender : I know NW will start 757 service to Europe so it is definetely possible. They might be going from Connecticut though.
27 MGA : Very true... I always thought it was true as I have flown on 763´s and A300´s and they were a bit more stable then my normal A320´s and 737´s. I
28 LASOctoberB6 : but why must our butts start feeling numb? bottoms make for a difficult time........
29 LTU932 : With that range, it may, only may, be able to go nonstop on an eastbound flight, however it will require a fuelstop on the westbound. Remember that D
30 STT757 : I just returned from my honeymoon cruise on November 11th, we flew EWR-Barcelona-EWR on a CO 757-200 in coach. The EWR-BCN segment was 7 hours, the B
31 N766UA : That's your one point I don't agree with. 4,000 miles can be a 10+ hour flight if you hit the jetstream the wrong way. Simple fact of the matter is p
32 Jetdeltamsy : Who operates these?
33 Post contains links and images Jacobin777 : I enjoyed flying on TZ's 753's a few times out of MDW...they are fun planes to sit in... MyAviation.net photo: Photo © Jacobin777
34 Klwright69 : Yes, this does sometimes happen. But you should provide the data regarding exactly how often this ACTUALLY happens so the reader can determine what y
35 Delta767300ER : Thats why I like the 767. The 2X3X2 seating on Y-Class makes it where your never more than 1 seat from an aisle. I can imagine being stuck in the mid
36 Dufo : Better 5 hours on a 757 than 2 on CRJ.
37 Post contains images Lightsaber : Nice! Lightsaber
38 KBGRbillT : I don't know if this makes it common or uncommon but I usually see 2 or 3 CO 752's stopping at BGR on there way back to the USA on the weekends. Not
39 MCOflyer : I love 757 flights too. They're very fun except when you get a seat that minimises body room (the seats that have closed sides and you pull your tray
40 PSU.DTW.SCE : NW will be using a special sub-fleet of 757-200's that will have winglets and a modified World Business Class from DTW, EWR, BOS, and BDL to Europe.
41 Max999 : That sub fleet also has two things which increases the range of the 752 so they can make Europe-DTW nonstop a possiblity. 1) Reduced number of Y seat
42 Gatorman96 : Will any 757-300's get winglets (or are there any already outfitted)
43 NA : Don´t get me wrong, I enjoy the 757 on flights of up to 3 or 4 hours, above that its inferior to any widebody. I´ve done that, and therefore I call
44 CHRISBA777ER : Not that ive heard but its surely a matter of time.
45 MBJ2000 : I fully agree with you! Had to fly earlier this year MUC - TFS, it was a 4-5 hours flight and a horrible experience in Condor's 757-300. I will give
46 Post contains images Beech19 : True... as you said i guess its just perception. With 6000-8000nm+ long flights being common place i look at the "status quo" for long haul moving on
47 IAHERJ : Guess you are right. I fly them often and haven't noticed the 12/210 in a while but still have that configuration on my id card backer for 757/767 di
49 Wingnut767 : We will be doing those mods in MCO on coach in the spring I bekieve. We have been doing the First class Mods for awhile. We are also going to be doin
50 ChinaClipper40 : What no one has yet mentioned is the difference in normal cruise speed between a 747 and a 757 (or 767 for that matter). Assuming a flight between eas
51 EWRCabincrew : How long will each plane take? Any chance of a tour (CO employee here, inflight for what it is worth)? Thanks, Bill
52 Stirling : I recently did MAD-EWR-SFO, on a 777, and a 738. The 777, while a wonderful airplane, bounced all over the sky...compared to a relatively smooth 738.
53 Nwab787techops : NWA's 753s are ETOPS A/C No, The STC is only for the B757-200. NWA looked at putting them on the 300's, but it would take too much work to beef up th
54 Coewraatysaz : I have flown on the CO 757 twice internationally... BXH-EWR and then another trip EWR-BRS. To be honest, the thing that bothered me the most was the e
55 N1120A : The 757 can carry a fair bit of cargo, it just has a problem with floor loading. Cargo wouldn't be the problem. If CO needed to carry cargo on the ro
56 FlyDreamliner : 753 CASM is absolutely incredible. Not so much. The 753 would be pushing its luck on many routes across the pond with the heavy winds..... there are
57 Post contains images Beech19 : When did they shut it down? As of yesterday we still had 767's being built... i haven't checked today... Yes the 747 is the fastest airliner flying t
58 Lemurs : An important factor for many business flyers is non-stop and frequencies. You have to look at the destinations CO flies these 752's to. They either op
59 Stirling : The end is soon. The point I was making is that they aren't making them like they used to. Favorite aircraft hands-down.
60 Post contains images Beech19 : I agree with it being my favorite... the inside at least. I like the 777 outside look better myself. They have a good 2.5-3 years of production left
61 Gatorman96 : Nwab787techops, Thanks for the reply...
62 Yellowtail : Really? I thought CO loads to BRS were iffy and only really continue to exist because of subsidies....also wern't CO to drop 2 752 routes or was that
63 Bobnwa : Many, if not most A.net rumors are myths, with zero credibility. Many members quote facts with sources, which is totally different.
64 Lemurs : Might be...I though CGN was iffy and BRS was doing great, but maybe I got it backwards? I was using BRS as an example only. They're not going to subs
65 Dutchjet : Just to clear up the speculation about CO cutting a transatlantic 757 route......last spring, there was one CO route that was performing below expecat
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...
Airbus 300 Across The Atlantic posted Mon May 24 1999 03:42:22 by Airbus boy
Why No UA 757-200 Ops Across The Atlantic? posted Wed Aug 9 2006 20:48:51 by DptMAN
Why No 737s Across The Atlantic? posted Mon Dec 4 2006 23:46:37 by Continental123
B-757 Across The Atlantic! Who Was First? posted Thu May 18 2006 16:18:35 by Delta777Jet
No Frills Across The Atlantic. posted Mon Jun 24 2002 14:16:21 by GunFighter 6
Ever Fly Continental Across The Atlantic? posted Wed Oct 17 2001 07:07:09 by M.Seles_Fan
Continental B757`s Across The Atlantic! posted Sun May 28 2000 08:34:10 by CY315
737 NGs Across The Atlantic posted Sun Jun 25 2006 23:32:42 by EssentialPowr
Single Engine Across The Atlantic - Crash posted Mon Jun 19 2006 18:17:18 by RomeoMike
Concorde Flight Paths Across The Atlantic. posted Sun Jun 18 2006 18:30:08 by MastaHanky