Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
US To Europe, 757 Replacements  
User currently onlineEIRules From Ireland, joined Aug 2007, 827 posts, RR: 10
Posted (2 months 4 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 23623 times:

I was wondering what peoples thoughts are on the routes currently flown by 757s to Europe by AA, DL and UA. How long more are the 757s going to operate these thinner routes for and what aircraft is likely to replace them in each of the airlines respective fleets?


Next Flights: EI DUB-LHR A320, BA LHR-SFO B744, UA SFO-LAS A320, BA LAS-LHR B744, EI LHR-DUB A320
153 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinekaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 12565 posts, RR: 35
Reply 1, posted (2 months 4 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 23572 times:

Personally, I think it will be a combination of A321 Neos and 737-9Max models. The current 739ER could probably make it across to Ireland (and of course, nothing further east really matters, as you know   ), but I don't know why the likes of UA or DL haven't bitten on that option, even though both operate it. AA currently operates A321s transcon, so they could probably make SNN/BOS-JFK/DUB. Perhaps it's a question of the cost and feasibility of getting these aircraft ETOPS certified?

User currently offlineOA260 From Ireland, joined Nov 2006, 27245 posts, RR: 60
Reply 2, posted (2 months 4 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 23513 times:

Quoting EIRules (Thread starter):
How long more are the 757s

I hope they are around for a while. Would be sad to see them go. They have also served Ireland well when otherwise there would have been no route.


User currently offlinemigair54 From Spain, joined Jun 2007, 1856 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (2 months 4 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 22975 times:

Some of the newest B757 are from 1999-2000 and 2001, so im sure they can easily fly for 10 more years if necessary.

The logic replacement must be the A321NEO, but I think airlines will wait a bit to see the real performance and some improvements before jumping to order them. We could also see some if the routes upgraded to B787 or B767.

How many B757 fly daily across the atlantic??


User currently offlineS75752 From United States of America, joined Apr 2014, 600 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (2 months 4 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 22851 times:

Oooh man the 757 TATL Hot topic rises again... One that I am personally passionate about as well.

My opinion;

Best scenario: 753-sized aircraft with 737-like controls and commonality(if possible?), made of carbon composites with a 50,000 minimum thrust per engine comes along with a 4,500 Mile real world range with headwinds (assuming the current 752's is about ~3500), also making it a replacement for a majority of 763 and non-ER 772 routes.

Worst scenario: The high yielding 752 routes (such as UA's EDI-EWR/ORD amongst others) are consolidated to 788/330 craft. The lower yielding ones are simply dropped and left to alliance partners on the European side, and it don't think it's very realistic to depend on the Neo/MAX range boost to bring it up to TATL capabilities compared to the existing craft. FI becomes the sole narrowbody TATL carrier (well, besides some others using YYT, which is pretty neat), using MAX's to reach more destinations in the northeastern US and Canada... If they don't end up just ditching or leasing those out like they did their 788's and 763's.

Based on what I have been told, the Best scenario is certainly just a dream. The worst scenario sounds most likely.


User currently offlineholzmann From United States of America, joined Jan 2011, 249 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (2 months 4 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 22842 times:

I flew my first B752 TATL crossing about two week ago, LHR-IAD on UA123. Besides an engine fire that resulted in a 4 hour delay, I have to say the experience was overall more pleasant than say flying a A333/A343. Something about the A333/A343 that make me feel claustrophobic. The curvature of the sidewalls? The small windows? If I have to rank my TATL flights by AC type, from best to worst, it has to be... B748, B763/B764, B772, B752, A333, A343.

User currently onlinepar13del From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 7488 posts, RR: 8
Reply 6, posted (2 months 4 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 22813 times:

Airbus wants those routes to be flown by A330's (any version) or A350's.
Boeing wants those routes to be flown by 787's (any version) or 777's.

The long range versions of the 737 and A321 (latest versions) do not have the range to match the 757, so since the 757 is sometimes constrained on some routes when the winds are not favorable imagine the effect on a/c with lower ranges and payload capacity.

If we call these "thin" routes marginal while operating with an a/c that is fully paid for and depreciated, imagine the effect if operated with a new frame with high purchase / lease cost. Routes will either be consolidated or dropped once the 757's go out of hours if no replacement is at hand, certainely I do not expect the market to wait for a replacement.
Life moves on, the market will have to be built again once a successor arrives.


User currently offlineairbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8576 posts, RR: 10
Reply 7, posted (2 months 4 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 22603 times:

US is one of the airlines openly pushing Airbus for a TATL capable A321NEO. So I think we know the answer to that question.

User currently onlinepar13del From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 7488 posts, RR: 8
Reply 8, posted (2 months 4 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 22528 times:

Quoting airbazar (Reply 7):
US is one of the airlines openly pushing Airbus for a TATL capable A321NEO.

The upcoming NEO still falls short in range and payload will always be lower, so when do we expect the next updated version or how long will it take to get the PIP's (if those are what is required) to get the a/c more capable of the TATL mission?


User currently onlineEIRules From Ireland, joined Aug 2007, 827 posts, RR: 10
Reply 9, posted (2 months 4 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 22513 times:

Quoting S75752 (Reply 4):

I don't think it's reasonable to think that thinner or lower yielding routes will simply be dropped and left to alliance partners. If I took that logic and looked at DUB this summer, then EWR-DUB, IAD-DUB UA, JFK-DUB AA and CLT-DUB US would all be dropped with no one taking on the routes as there is no alliance partner at DUB. I simply don't see all that capacity just being dropped



Next Flights: EI DUB-LHR A320, BA LHR-SFO B744, UA SFO-LAS A320, BA LAS-LHR B744, EI LHR-DUB A320
User currently offlineS75752 From United States of America, joined Apr 2014, 600 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (2 months 4 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 22353 times:

Quoting EIRules (Reply 9):

UA and EI do codeshore as partners. I'm almost surprised that EI hasn't joined *A! The IAD-DUB could be consolidated in to the EWR-DUB and upguaged anyways, as it overflies EWR. CLT-DUB could be consolidated to the PHL-DUB and upguaged as well. The issue becomes not so much losing the low yields...

But if there are no 752's to do those routes with left, then that'd mean a lot of empty seats on a 332 or 788.

Quoting par13del (Reply 6):
If we call these "thin" routes marginal while operating with an a/c that is fully paid for and depreciated, imagine the effect if operated with a new frame with high purchase / lease cost.

This is why a 752 replacement would need to be more efficient; so the margins can be better, and so it can also function as more than just a 752 replacement, but also as a 763 replacement. TATL is indeed a 3000-3700 mile niche it fills nicely, but just imagine how much more can be done with it if it extends its real world range to 4500 miles.


User currently offlinefrostyj From UK - Northern Ireland, joined Aug 2014, 301 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (2 months 4 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 22347 times:

I live 2,500 nautical miles from Boston and 2,700 nautical miles from NYC.

The 737-900ER can easily fly here with a nautical mile range of 3,300. The United Airlines 737-900 aircraft have the same configuration as the 757's so for us on the island of Ireland I don't see the problem on replacing the 757.

I am sure some days it would be pushing it but being 600 nautical miles into the range there should not be a problem.

[Edited 2014-08-29 05:43:14]


{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252 {\fonttbl\f0\fswiss\fcharset0 Helvetica;} {\colortbl;\red255\green255\blue255;\red0\green0\blue0
User currently offlineparapente From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2006, 1642 posts, RR: 10
Reply 12, posted (2 months 4 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 22303 times:

WOW it must be at least a week since the last 757-200 and the A321NEO TATL debate. And hell it is a Friday - so here we go again!

As reply 4 said -Oooh man the 757 TATL Hot topic rises again...

Very soon you will see the post that tells you just how small % 757 TATL market is (so I won't spoil it).
And that the A321NEO with the geared fan just has not quite got the range.
But that they have just increased the power for the said engine -(and T/O weight?). Why?
So we don't really know.
Indeed another writer will tell you that
P&W are said to have another 5% 'in their pocket'.
Another will tell you that it depends what you mean by TATL ie from exactly where in the US to where in Europe.

Soon (ish) the A320 NEO will start its tests. Then perhaps Airbus will start to 'know' rather than computer predictions of what it can and can't do.
One thing is for certain. With the A321NEO selling the way it is already,Airbus ain't going to 'bust a gut' just to get this very small market. But if it can they most certainly will.

I think what is more interesting is the performance of the A321NEO in general. They have just upped its max pax capacity quite markedly. (240 plus pax?) .The 737-9 can't go there. They have this market to themselves for the mo'.
The next plane size leap is a huge one to widebodied 788's or 338's.
One sees Boeing ramping up 737 prod enormously.Interesting.
One sees Boeing totally committed (resource) to the phenomenal 777X project for the next 5 years.
....But then what?
Then you will see the launch of their narrow bodied replacement. The first model out will be the largest (I think) at 250 seats.(with a 200 seater -800 replacement- coming later).
So the A321NEO should be able to enjoy a little 10 year window of success.But that's it IMHO
Whether it includes TATL we will have to wait and see if it can do it or not.


User currently offlineburnsie28 From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 7558 posts, RR: 8
Reply 13, posted (2 months 4 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 22239 times:

Quoting frostyj (Reply 11):

I live 2,500n miles from Boston and 2,700 nmiles to NYC respectively.

The 737-900ER can easily fly here with a nmile range of 3,300 miles. The United ones even have the same configuration so for us on the island of Ireland I don't see the problem.

Realistically the 737-900ER can only make it 2,870 miles or 2,493 nautical miles.



"Some People Just Know How To Fly"- Best slogan ever, RIP NW 1926-2009
User currently offlineVCEflyboy From Canada, joined Jun 2014, 506 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (2 months 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 22170 times:

One question RE the reliability: are those 757s unreliable because they are old or is the 757 just unreliable?
I am asking because I used to fly on the FM 757 frequently but do not recall any delay. But then again I learned recently that those are / were (not sure if they are still flying) the youngest 757 birds around.


User currently offlinefrostyj From UK - Northern Ireland, joined Aug 2014, 301 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (2 months 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 22099 times:

Quoting burnsie28 (Reply 13):

BFS to BOS is 2,570 nautical miles.



{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252 {\fonttbl\f0\fswiss\fcharset0 Helvetica;} {\colortbl;\red255\green255\blue255;\red0\green0\blue0
User currently onlinepar13del From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 7488 posts, RR: 8
Reply 16, posted (2 months 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 22017 times:

Quoting parapente (Reply 12):
The 737-9 can't go there. They have this market to themselves for the mo'.
The next plane size leap is a huge one to widebodied 788's or 338's.

Boeing's only other option other than a new build is to take some weight out of the 767-200 to make it more efficient, how much the tanker contract can assist in this regard is another story,


User currently offlineairbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8576 posts, RR: 10
Reply 17, posted (2 months 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 21865 times:

Quoting par13del (Reply 8):
The upcoming NEO still falls short in range and payload will always be lower, so when do we expect the next updated version or how long will it take to get the PIP's (if those are what is required) to get the a/c more capable of the TATL mission?

"Out of the box" the first NEO's are already capable of most TATL routes operated by AA/US: LIS, GLA, EDI, SNN, MAN, DUB.
It's UA that will have to wait a little longer for their routes into Germany and places like BCN, OSL, ARN, but it will come.


User currently offlineRoseflyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 9697 posts, RR: 52
Reply 18, posted (2 months 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 21867 times:

This is a common topic. In general, the number of 757s flying 7-8 hour routes is only 100-200 airplanes. That is not a large enough market for Airbus or Boeing to be particularly interested in. There is a market out there for an airplane with a MTOW of 250,000 - 350,000 like the 757, but the problem is, the market is too small for Boeing or Airbus to be interested in putting billions of dollars into it. Airplanes are getting more and more expensive to design and develop, so Airbus and Boeing have less motivation to build more models.

The 737 and A320 are getting undercut from the smaller side, so if they continue pushing the airframes to have higher takeoff weights, that limits their efficiency at shorter ranges. There are some vocal airlines like United, Delta, American, Copa, Alaska, Hawaiian, Icelandair etc that want more range out of 737s and A320s. However while large and significant customers, the average route of a 737 or A320 is about 900 miles and about 2 hours long. So while there are a few airlines pushing airplanes beyond 5 hours, most airlines are not. In order to increase the MTOW by 10,000 - 20,000 lbs, the whole airframe is going to take some penalties due to stronger gear, higher tire loading, structural weight increases, etc. If appeasing the needs of a few airlines costs the overall airplane 1 or 2% efficiency, then Airbus or Boeing run the risk of losing orders to airlines interested in operating short 1 hour hops or looking at the smaller MAX-7 or A319NEO. Airbus and Boeing cannot please everyone. I also assume that airlines like British Airways, Air France, KLM and Lufthansa are advocating against MTOW increases. Higher MTOW only hurts these airlines that exclusively operate short haul since it costs efficiency and increases landing fees. A subtle and more sinister desire to prevent their American counterparts from stealing traffic operating to secondary cities in the UK, France, Germany etc might also exist. The European airlines would prefer traffic from cities like MAN, NCL, EDI, TXL, NCE, BCN, LIS, etc to feed through their main hubs. A higher TOW A321 or 737MAX would increase competition.

The longest routes operated by 737s are about 3300 miles. These are north south routes with less winds, but with improved range due to efficiency with the MAX and NEO, that should mean that east west routes should be doable. That means New York or Boston to the UK or Ireland should be possible with occasional westbound fuel stops. I do not think we will see the 737 or A320 family making it to the mainland European continent.

I think the 757 will live on with the last routes being mainland Europe to the United States before retirement. Then the route will either sustain a 787 or go away. There is not enough demand in my opinion to justify building an airplane for this market.



If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
User currently offlineholzmann From United States of America, joined Jan 2011, 249 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (2 months 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 21663 times:

Why oh why did B destroy the 757 tooling so fast???

How "difficult" or costly would it have been to take the 752, throw on a 787-style wing (like the 748) and install new, modern engines. Throw in the latest interior cabin design...call it a 757-8...

Can anyone Photoshop this for me?
752 + 787 wing + chevron engines...


User currently offlinedfambro From United States of America, joined Nov 2009, 343 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (2 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 21570 times:

Quoting Roseflyer (Reply 18):
In general, the number of 757s flying 7-8 hour routes is only 100-200 airplanes. That is not a large enough market for Airbus or Boeing to be particularly interested in. There is a market out there for an airplane with a MTOW of 250,000 - 350,000 like the 757, but the problem is, the market is too small for Boeing or Airbus to be interested in putting billions of dollars into it.

If the aircraft was available with state-of-the-art efficiency, you might see a lot more demand for a large narrow-body that can fly those routes. It would fit right in with the 'point-to-point' model that Boeing has used to justify the 787.


User currently offlineRoseflyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 9697 posts, RR: 52
Reply 21, posted (2 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 21421 times:

Quoting holzmann (Reply 19):
Why oh why did B destroy the 757 tooling so fast???

People seem to think that tooling to make a fuselage behind scrapped is a big concern. It is far more than that. Of the 1000 suppliers making 757 parts, only a few are making spares. The production line was shut down because airlines do not want such an airplane in significant quantities. The 737-900ER is 20% more efficient than the 757 and can operate 80% of the routes. The 757 was overbuilt because in the 1970s, short field performance was a major concern since many major cities only had runways in the 5,000-7,000ft range. Now, there are some niche regional airports with short runways, and some with busy airports with slot and perimeter restrictions, but in general there is no need to be able to fly 2,500 miles from a 5,000ft runway. There is not a major metropolitan market in the world without a 9,000ft runway that is used for flights over 1,500 miles, which means that a 737-900ER despite needing miles of runway, can operate the routes that the 757 was designed for. Passengers see the 757 having great capability, but they do not see the excessive fuel being burnt to provide capability that is only utilized on a hundred or so routes.

Quoting holzmann (Reply 19):

How "difficult" or costly would it have been to take the 752, throw on a 787-style wing (like the 748) and install new, modern engines. Throw in the latest interior cabin design...call it a 757-8...

The supply chain for the 757 is gone. All the parts that went into the airplane are obsolete. New suppliers would have to be found. You are looking at something costing more than any other derivative that has ever been made. At this point, you might as well start new than trying to reinvent a 35 year old design. The FAA would require a new type certificate anyway.

Quoting dfambro (Reply 20):

If the aircraft was available with state-of-the-art efficiency, you might see a lot more demand for a large narrow-body that can fly those routes. It would fit right in with the 'point-to-point' model that Boeing has used to justify the 787.

Such an airplane would have to sell over a thousand to be economically viable. Low production numbers mean that there are fewer frames to spread development costs over which makes an airplane prohibitively expensive. Yes a new plane would create demand, but is it big enough to justify the development costs? If the market is only 400-500 planes, Boeing or Airbus would struggle to be able to sell the airplane for less than a 787 or A330. To the airline CEO, who would buy an updated 757 size airplane when he could get a 787 for the same price?



If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
User currently offlinepjc747 From United States of America, joined Dec 2011, 85 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (2 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 21299 times:

This is the reason why a direct replacement for the 757 is so necessary.

DL flies JFK to Malaga, which is 3,288nm planned. That exceeds the loaded range of the A321 and the 737-900ER. Of course they could fly with much less load to make it to Malaga, Pisa, Stockholm, Dakar, and others, but this would likely exclude the 171 passengers, which include 15 J, 44 Y+, and 108 Y which the 757 provides the capacity to fill, seeing as these other routes are longer.

Ranges:

Baseline: 757-200 w/winglets: 4,100nm

A321ceo w/ sharklets: 3,200nm

737-900ER w/ winglets: 3,265nm

A321neo: ~3,650nm

737-9 MAX: ~3,595nm

Of course you can't forget that nothing replaces the 757-300, which is the only narrowbody which can carry over 220 people with F, Y+ and Y. DL carries 224 or 234 depending on the plane's config, and United does 214. It also has a range of 3,595nm, meaning it can do what a 737-9 MAX does with many more passengers, including go to Hawaii and be competitive with a small widebody.


User currently offlineairbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8576 posts, RR: 10
Reply 23, posted (2 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 21279 times:

Quoting Roseflyer (Reply 18):
This is a common topic. In general, the number of 757s flying 7-8 hour routes is only 100-200 airplanes. That is not a large enough market for Airbus or Boeing to be particularly interested in.

But that's a consequence of said aircraft not existing. A 752 type aircraft with 20% better fuel economy would sell far more than 100-200 copies. Oh wait, that is the A321NEO  


User currently offlinemjoelnir From Iceland, joined Feb 2013, 1478 posts, RR: 3
Reply 24, posted (2 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 21239 times:

There are enough rather young B757 out there to keep them flying on North Atlantic routes for years. When on all other routes the B757 has been replaced by A321neo and B737-9MAX the last B757 will fly the longer routes and/or hot and high.

25 Post contains links Revelation : Sounds similar to what they are doing on the 777X program, and we read that when Boeing was asking for bids for other locations to host the program t
26 PEK777 : Boeing should re-open the 757 line, there is obviously a demand for this type of aircraft. Would they consider a 757NEO?
27 par13del : If they had only looked at engines it would be less costly, but today everyone wants everything to be upgraded so back to square one, new airplane ma
28 par13del : Why, as mentioned including in my last post, the suppliers are the issue, so why not move to an older frame that is still in production and for which
29 dank : Because the 321 (especially the NEO) and the 739 (particularly the Max) can do almost all the routes the 757 can, I'm not sure where this obvious dem
30 DocLightning : For one route? An entire new type for one route? Or even three? Look, there may be some routes that have to stop after the 757 is gone because no oth
31 boeingrulz : Speaking from my experience as a traveler to LIS from the Pacific Northwest of the US; UA and US fly the 757 to LIS from the East coast. Those of us o
32 silentbob : Agreed, I think the next generation narrow body offerings from Airbus and Boeing will include a model that covers all of the current 757 missions. Ai
33 N62NA : This struck me as a very interesting observation, and it flies in the face of what I (and perhaps others) would have thought: That with all our new t
34 frostyj : But you are only thinking on this from an American point of view. In places like Ireland and Scotland we are small and so don't have as many connecti
35 MD80Nut : It's easy to forget the 757 was not designed as a long range narrow body aircraft, but rather a jack of all trades that could do one hour hops to tran
36 pjc747 : Because although size-wise and range-wise the A321 and 737-900ER and their new engien counterparts can replace most of what the 757 does, it doesn't
37 brilondon : I would have thought that the 787-3 would actually made a great replacement as it has the capacity and the legs to replace any 757 mission. I suspect
38 777stl : #1. Because 757s weren't selling. They practically had to give away the last few that they built. Despite the assertions on this website otherwise, t
39 pjc747 : I'm not going to judge what they're doing, but I will say that simply because said business runs said business said way doesn't mean its done correct
40 frostyj : We are looking for a replacement for short transatlantic flights.
41 par13del : The computers are much better but the cost of the software and the programmers have introduced new cost so........ No, but that is more realistic tha
42 N104UA : Would expect the awaited 797 to have a longer variant that can make it to Europe, it seems now most a/c of that size could be sold in an ER or LR vers
43 cloudboy : One problem that keeps happening here on these boards is that so many assume a) that the market demand for flights is always going to remain the same,
44 global2 : Exactly! I always choose window seats but the A330's slanted sidewall feels like it's in my face and makes me feel like I'm in a small RJ. It's amazi
45 EIDL : DUB is significantly under 9000ft, and is used for 5,100 mile flights multiple times a week and daily as of next year. Takeoff performance still matt
46 Post contains images lightsaber : There is work being done to make the A321NEO have enough range to do the 752 TATL routes. Not the out of the box version (with 3,650nm range vs. the
47 MIflyer12 : If DUB is the biggest metro you can cite, Roseflyer's point is made.
48 Centre : Out of curiosity; how many routes/aircrafts that are we looking at here that are worth developing a replacement for the 757?
49 wjcandee : Why a replacement at any time in the next 15 years? A 762 isn't going to do it, because its economics are burdened by its wider body, which makes it s
50 777Jet : 757s across the pond are uncomfortable enough (as much as I love the 757 - short flights only please!). I could probably live with A321s doing 757 tr
51 ltbewr : Already some 757 flights have issues on TATL ops due to headwinds in the Westbound direction in the Winter and having to make a fuel stop in eastern C
52 S75752 : Airlines don't want another 752 or 753 - they'd need and want something new, something different. This is why I'm saying that a 757 replacement would
53 Max Q : Nothing can replace a 757, not now or anything planned. What does that mean, do you even know ? Exactly Nonsense, your 'range estimate' is hopelessly
54 Opethfan : For the sake of discussion, I'm going to throw the Bombardier name into the ring as a long-shot hypothetical. My thinking is this: BBD are quickly los
55 Post contains links frostyj : Erm i'm not quite sure about that. I'm just back from a 6 hour United Airlines flight and it was fantastic.. we had pillows, blankets and our own tv
56 frostyj : BFS-EWR DUB-EWR SNN-EWR GLA-EWR EDI-EWR MAN-EWR BHX-EWR LHR-EWR Have never had a fuel stop on a 757.
57 frostyj : Well I just got the data and took 30% off the 737-900ER range and the results showed 2400 nautical miles so we are just within the boundary. Where I
58 par13del : In my opinion we have two issues, one related to the market and the other to the duopoly in a/c builders. Let's start with the duopoly. Airbus design
59 brilondon : After reading all the posts, and yes I read them all. I also did some research of my own and realized that the number of aircraft we are talking about
60 frostyj : No you are wrong. Its hard to count but we have the 737 on Dublin to St Johns, from Ireland basically nearly all our routes are narrow bodies. We hav
61 airbazar : It's not just replacements. An aircraft like the A321NEO will be significantly cheaper to operate and therefore open up routes that could not be done
62 frostyj : I don't even know why they even bothered putting Berlin on a 757. I mean realistically that is just absolutely ridiculous flying a narrow body aircra
63 planewasted : Exactly what in uncomfortable about the 757? Flew UA 777 from BRU to EWR and UA 757 back to OSL. No difference in comfort, maybe a bit cozier on the
64 LJ : Yet Airbus will be making an A330-300R. It's prrobably too large for the missions the 757 is flying on, but maybe Airbus could be persuaded to make a
65 United1 : Exactly...the only noticeable difference between a UA 777 and a UA International 752 in Y is the size of the entertainment library (777s have a highe
66 planesmart : Cost of purchase / written down value and operating cost must make the 757 very difficult to replace. Nothing new build will come close, and the possi
67 777stl : This is the truth. The number of 757s worldwide that fly transoceanic, and I'm lumping Hawaii routes in that too, is probably under 100. It is a very
68 Post contains images 777Jet : Was it on a 757 as that is what we are talking about? Or a 737 as we are talking about them too? Really? Wow! What are these so called things called
69 S75752 : Looking back, not... really... I think what I was getting at was Type rating or something like that. But I don't remember. What's even the point of t
70 TWA772LR : The flights from Germany-EWR are the ones that mostly have the fuel stops in the winter. I think an aircraft the size of a 753 with 5000nm range with
71 opticalilyushin : In 2010 (i think) i flew my first 757 from BFS-EWR, but with it being around the time of the Icelandic ash cloud we got a more scenic flight routing.
72 Max Q : You are missing the point and making it at the same time. If the production line had remained open and / or with a 'NG' version of the 757 these 'Nic
73 AngMoh : You missed the point too. The 757 did not sell and would not have been selling if the production line did stay open. To stay open and profitable, Boe
74 S75752 : I'm thinking 753 size wise, maybe a slightly wider fuselage. 787 Tech, constructed with composites. Winglets or raked tips, I don't know which. Engin
75 Max Q : The 757 sold very well and it was already profitable, not sure why you think it wasn't. It could easily have sold another 500 examples, especially wi
76 frostyj : Just as a matter of interest what is the furthest west that has a fuel stop? I am trying to calculate the fuel stop region of a 737-900ER
77 frostyj : Its not normally anywhere near that length. Mines in June was 6 hours and 30 minutes.
78 baconbutty : It sold just over 1000 aircraft in the narrow body segment, having had a choice of engine and lengths together with freighter and combo versions. 800
79 parapente : Nice to see that this weeks 'bring back the 757 thread is still going strong! Lets look to the future.looking at the main competition - The A321 NEO.
80 airbazar : That already exists. It's called the 787-800. That all depended on what you use as a measurement. With nearly 600 frames sold before first flight I'd
81 A340313X : For the same reason people slam the A343 for being slow. The 757 is a Ferrari, fast, good looking, sounds great, people have good memories of them. I
82 parapente : airbazar reply 80 To me the A321neo has the ability to be a bigger game changer than the 787 ever was. Well I am not sure I would go that far! But in
83 LJ : Ask the Chinese, they're rumoured to buy 100+ of these A330-300Rs. Anyway, we focus here on US airlines as this topic relates to US - Europe. However
84 S75752 : That's quite a gap in number of seats and overall size... And it seems airlines are shifting more toward the bigger 789 anyways, widening the gap eve
85 Post contains links Revelation : There is/was no shortage of 757 frames with tons of life on them. FedEx has proved that. If those routes were so valuable then the airlines would hav
86 intotheair : I decided to do some of my own rudimentary fleet planning. I don't know how to calculate fuel burn or any other metric that real fleet planners probab
87 Post contains images lightsaber : The 757 will never return partially due to the *high* maintenance costs of the frame relative to the A320 and 737. For that size in the market, custom
88 Post contains images planemaker : Just about everyone forgets this important point! The market spoke.. no airline or leasing company would buy a 757 when they could buy a 737 or A321
89 by738 : It will never return because the tooling has been binned thats all.
90 planemaker : I use to think that as well but... From WSJ article by Jon Ostrower and Robert Wall.
91 par13del : We are talking about n/b a/c and the gap that exist, so the 787 and A330 do not count. Now if you wonder why some of us tout the 767-200 as a replace
92 kd5mdk : Given how superior the A321neo is, I think the best step would be for Boeing to abandon the narrowbody market and concentrate on twin aisle aircraft.
93 airbazar : Regardless, the 788 is the plane to use if you need to transport 200 pax, for 5,000nm. You can't do that with a narrow body. The plane would be too l
94 Post contains links lightsaber : Agreed. And then the 738 was able to reach Hawaii which further took away 752 markets... Huh? The A321 and 739 are the replacement on US domestic rou
95 Viscount724 : An Icelandair senior executive recently said they expected to be flying the 757 until at least 2025. Those are all among the shortest transatlantic 7
96 cloudboy : I have always been confused by aircraft models numbering, especially types. So this is request for some clarification on aircraft modes. Now, the way
97 Viscount724 : Significantly longer range was the major difference. The 757's much larger wing carries roughly twice as much fuel as 737 models through the -300/400/
98 pjc747 : Boeing could make an MD-8, since the DC-8-61 could fly 5,080nm with 200 passengers. Imagine a DC-8-70 with the CFM LEAP-X installed. That would be co
99 Viscount724 : The DC-8-61 had nowhere near that much range. The -61 was basically a -50 series with a 37-foot fuselage stretch and the same maximum takeoff weight.
100 Post contains links pjc747 : See page 51: http://www.boeing.com/assets/pdf/commercial/airports/acaps/dc8sec3.pdf At about 47,000 pounds payload (max 51,745) it could fly 5,000nm,
101 intotheair : Take a look again, as I did address it (though not the A321 specifically), and it is in my spreadsheet. Of any other narrowbody, the A321 is closest
102 Schweigend : I believe that the true 757 replacement will come when Boeing finally decides to launch a new narrowbody design. The 727 / 737 / 757 fuselage has bee
103 wjcandee : You guys can do all the analysis of marketing pieces from manufacturers that you want, the bottom line is you have no idea how the aircraft actually f
104 TWA772LR : Don't forget DL operates some long 757 routes from ATL to secondary Brazilian cities sometimes those flights push 9 hours. They did operate the 763 an
105 pjc747 : I wonder coming off my DC-8 reference, whether these planes could be refurbished in this manner, and like Northwest's DC-9-50's, which were restored
106 S75752 : NB TATL is a niche, but Japan's high density domestic and short range stuff is a smaller niche... Yet Boeing served that tiny niche with the 747SR an
107 Opethfan : Probably because adapting an existing design for a lower MTOW is far cheaper than a clean sheet design or even keeping an otherwise untenable line go
108 Max Q : Avery respectable number. It would have been a lot higher. Not sure what is the aircraft you say the 757 replaced but i'm guessing you're referring t
109 planemaker : Acceptable is a more apt description considering that it had no real competition, the number includes freighters in the total and it had the benefit
110 Viscount724 : The DC-8-61 never operated routes remotely that long. Note that the Boeing numbers you quote also don't take winds or cargo into account. Even 5,000
111 DocLightning : What? With thousands of both A320s and 737s sold you want them to abandon one of their biggest cash cows? Whatever for?
112 kd5mdk : Because people aren't talking very much here about the 737-9MAX, it's mostly about the A321neo. If Boeing isn't going to compete on the bigger and lon
113 parapente : Reply 102, I believe that the true 757 replacement will come when Boeing finally decides to launch a new narrowbody design. The 727 / 737 / 757 fusela
114 airbazar : That will likely be a far superior airplane and more capable than the 757 ever was. So just like the A321 is not exactly a 757 replacement, whatever
115 jetblastdubai : I'm in the other camp on this topic. I believe the 757 has morphed into a role that should not be replaced by another narrowbody but a small widebody
116 airbazar : That's a bad analogy. AB only has a single hub in all of Europe. UA has 7 hubs in the U.S. UA's business model is far more fragmented than AB's so th
117 jetblastdubai : But UA only flies to TXL from ONE hub. If they flew from all 7 hubs, it'd be different.
118 frostyj : Ugh i've already said the alliance route will not work for us. Some of us only have one route to the USA which is important for our economy.
119 jetblastdubai : Sorry, I should have excluded Ireland/Scotland or Northern UK as they do not have reasonable hub connections as you mentioned previously. The longer
120 airbazar : UA through their TATL JV with LH has multiple daily alternatives for getting its passengers to Berlin and other points in Europe.
121 DocLightning : The difference is that aircraft like the 747-400D were minor modifications and mostly paper de-rates. But an up-rate is a wholly different prospect a
122 frostyj : Why would I bother going back on myself?
123 DocLightning : Because you still haven't explained to me why it is so unacceptable that you don't have service to all these US cities nonstop. What is so onerous ab
124 frostyj : Well the population of the island of Ireland is 7 million so I expect a service to America. Don't expect me to backtrack one timezone and 1,000 miles
125 MIflyer12 : Are you refering to the one daily ATL-BSB flight? IMHO, the intercontinental 757 routes exist because of a happy confluence of amortized aircraft and
126 Boeing717200 : At nominal payload, the range for a 737-9MAX is 2,600nm zero wind (with headwinds that's about 2,100nm range). You also need nearly 11,000 feet of ru
127 mjoelnir : Is the B737-9MAX or even the A321neo a replacement for a 757-200 or a 757-300 at there upper reaches of lift capabilities and/or or range? IMO the ans
128 par13del : Not implying anything, we all agree that these a/c are operating the bulk of 757 missions but they are doing so by getting more and more of the capab
129 planesmart : Very well put.
130 Viscount724 : Backtracking via continental Europe hubs can be faster than other routings involving a transatlantic nonstop from Ireland. For example, from DUB to S
131 Revelation : You're just not making sense. You're saying at the time airlines were struggling to find a role for 757 in their fleets and there were enough used 75
132 frostyj : No its not. We have immigration in Dublin and there is already a flight to San Francisco. It takes 90 minutes to fly to Amsterdam then you have to in
133 EIDL : Clearing all US "formalities" in DUB and landing at JFK as a domestic flight is much nicer than dealing with immigration in SEA after having had two
134 Max Q : You seem to be getting your time frame mixed up. First of all airlines have never 'struggled to find a role for their 757's' it is the most flexible
135 airbazar : So what you're saying is that Boeing and/or Airbus should design an entire airplane model based on the fact that 1 city in Europe has immigration pre
136 frostyj : They actually do.
137 Revelation : Are you talking about the same airframe that launch customer BA abandoned en mass in favor of A320 and A321? It may be flexible but that flexibility
138 Post contains images LPDAL : Considering how long the type has been in service, I think it should have a proven track record when it comes to reliability. -LPDAL
139 lugie : That's a cool idea, I think I might try and montage it. However I think the name should rather be 757-5, idk why, just sounds more fitting in my opin
140 EIDL : Where are you getting that from? Not since last summer. All do now.
141 Viscount724 : I forgot about preclearance in Ireland, but even so I would much prefer to connect to a nonstop to the west coast at AMS than connect at JFK which, u
142 Max Q : The 757 was never a big seller in Europe apart from BA and they didn't need the performance that the US Carriers need from it. They could afford to r
143 lightsaber : Many of the routes US, UA (pre-merger) and CO flew the 757 TATL would not have supported a 767 (lowest cost per flight next largest option). It isn't
144 Post contains images hilram : DY is already flying a 788 between Oslo and New York. As far as I know there is no yield problem on this route.
145 EIDL : Remember that you're arriving and hence connecting as if you're on a domestic flight - something JFK *was* definitely designed for. And T5 there is a
146 frostyj : I use EWR when flying to American destinations. NEVER have I used JFK. The airlines that fly in there have rubbish planes with poor IFE onboard to be
147 dejmurph : Due to fly DUB-CLT next year on a 757 with US. They must be the only TA carrier out of DUB without PTVs. Does anyone have any info on any plans to ins
148 Post contains links frostyj : Um American Airlines.. Ireland To The Big AApple | Part 1: DUB-JFK (by 321neo Aug 12 2013 in Trip Reports)[Edited 2014-09-05 06:16:56]
149 Viscount724 : You often have to change terminals at JFK which is very inconvenient. And you still have the issues of poor on-time performance at JFK, more weather
150 EIDL : If you're going west coast, connect at SFO. I'd rather worry about poor on-time performance of the second flight at JFK than risk missing the flight
151 Post contains links frostyj : I've already said to him that we had the flight to SFO. I don't think they understand that there is no immigration facility in Amsterdam and the fact
152 Revelation : Why do you say it's little known? We have all kinds of time saving perks offered to premium passengers. I'd also say the trait is that many premium p
153 AngMoh : It is virtually impossible to miss the flight due to security delays in AMS. Coming from Ireland/Uk and departing to US, there is no immigration nor
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...
US To Europe Flights Arriving Very Early posted Wed Jan 4 2012 08:13:05 by TWA1985
US To Europe Questions posted Sat Jan 16 2010 19:45:01 by Flytravel
BA Plan Premium Class Services From US To Europe posted Fri Jun 15 2007 18:12:58 by VV701
Transiting From US To Europe Via YYZ posted Mon Oct 16 2006 20:48:09 by AF022
Ever Fly "backwards" From US To Europe posted Sun Jan 25 2004 22:30:51 by KaiGywer
Airlines In US To Europe posted Sun Dec 28 2003 00:23:18 by Flyingchoirboy
Non-smoking Flights From US To Europe posted Fri Nov 17 2000 04:57:18 by KALB
US Airlines 757 To Europe - Triangle? posted Tue Sep 4 2012 01:45:35 by futurestar68
US Airways 757's To Europe. Questions... posted Sat Feb 11 2006 15:40:39 by Gilesdavies
US Airways 757's To Europe? posted Tue Dec 20 2005 14:00:08 by Gilesdavies